EXPIRED
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
NIDA Program Project Grant Applications (P01)
P01 Research Program Projects
Reissue of PAR-13-259
PAR-16-393
None
93.279
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) announces the availability of support for collaborative research by multi-disciplinary teams which is of high priority to NIDA and leads to synergistic outcomes based on the synthesis of multiple research approaches. The NIDA Program Projects funding opportunity will support research in which the funding of three or more highly meritorious projects as a group enriches both the component projects and the overall program to offer significant scientific advantages over supporting the same projects as individual research grants (i.e., synergy). For the duration of the award, each Program must consist of a minimum of three research projects focused on issues critical to advance the mission and goals of NIDA.
August 5, 2016
August 25, 2016
30 days prior to the application due date.
Standard dates apply, by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. All types of non-AIDS applications allowed for this funding opportunity announcement are due on these dates.
The first standard application due date for this FOA is September 25, 2016.
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.
Standard AIDS dates apply by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. All types of AIDS and AIDS-related applications allowed for this funding opportunity announcement are due on these dates
The first AIDS application due date for this FOA is January 7, 2017.
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.
Standard dates apply
Standard dates apply
Standard dates apply
New Date January 24, 2018 per issuance of PAR-18-425. (Original Expiration Date: September 8, 2019)
Not Applicable
NIH’s new Application Submission System & Interface for Submission Tracking (ASSIST) is available for the electronic preparation and submission of multi-project applications through Grants.gov to NIH. Applications to this FOA must be submitted electronically using ASSIST or an institutional system-to-system solution; paper applications will not be accepted. ASSIST replaces the Grants.gov downloadable forms currently used with most NIH opportunities and provides many features to enable electronic multi-project application submission and improve data quality, including: pre-population of organization and PD/PI data, pre-submission validation of many agency business rules and the generation of data summaries in the application image used for review.
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Multi-Project Instructions for the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this FOA or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts) and where instructions in the Application Guide are directly related to the Grants.gov downloadable forms currently used with most NIH opportunities. Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions. Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
Part 1. Overview Information
Part 2. Full Text of the Announcement
Section
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Section II. Award Information
Section III. Eligibility Information
Section IV. Application and Submission
Information
Section V. Application Review Information
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Section VII. Agency Contacts
Section VIII. Other Information
Program projects are expected to be broadly based investigative efforts with a clear, well-defined, and unifying goal or theme to establish the direction, objectives, and aims of the overall Program.
The efforts should address critical issues of neuroscience, genetics, behavior, prevention, treatment, epidemiology, etiology, health services, HIV/AIDS, and co-occurring opportunistic infections (e.g., viral hepatitis C, tuberculosis, sexually transmitted infections) associated consequences in substance abusing populations, medication development, or other research areas relevant to drug abuse.
A Program will comprise at least three inter-related research projects judged to be independently scientifically meritorious, complementary of one another, and demonstrate an essential element of unity and interdependence, i.e., a system of research activities and projects directed toward a well-defined research program goal. The Program must include an administrative core, and may also include common or shared resources (cores) required for the conduct of the research projects. If cores are included, each must provide infrastructure for a minimum of two contributing research projects and result in increased productivity contributing to synergy of the research effort as a whole. The application needs to justify that a Program is required for this desired level of integration and productivity.
The Program is expected to have appropriate and effective administrative and organizational capabilities to support multidisciplinary research, to foster synergy, to support shared equipment, facilities, or other resources whenever possible, and to support planning and evaluation activities through an administrative core.
In designing the administrative core consideration should be given : (a) an overall programmatic structure that effectively promotes scientific interactions and provides for internal quality control of research and publications, and (b) an administrative organization that has clear lines of authority, is managed efficiently and cost effectively, and enables effective use and leverage of resources. Depending on the nature of the Program, additional considerations may include the use of (a) an external advisory structure (e.g., DSMB) that is charged to provide appropriate and objective advice and evaluation, as needed, to the PD/PI; and (b) an internal advisory, decision-making, and priority setting process to support the activities of the Program.
The Program is expected to have a scientifically and administratively qualified Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) with responsibility for the scientific, operational, administrative, and budgetary aspects of the Program, e.g. coordinating and developing the Program, providing leadership, ensuring interaction and collaboration among scientists, monitoring ongoing research, identifying a need to expand or contract research within the Program, and identifying the need to seek additional or reallocate existing resources. The PD/PI should be an outstanding, productive, senior researcher, as documented by publications, patents, honors, and similar indices of stature.
More than one PD/PI (i.e., multiple PDs/PIs) may be designated, but the application must present strong rationale for choosing a multiple-PD/PI approach. Effort may be divided between administrative and scientific duties.
There must be at least 3 individual research projects which may focus on any area of NIDA's mission, but must bear an essential relationship to the program project’s integrating theme. The rationale for selecting the individual research projects and cores, as well as their respective leaders, should be explicit. Individual research projects must work in synergy to contribute to each other and to the Program overall. The combination of specific projects should produce a context and relationships which allow each research effort to share the creative strengths of the others and result in a greater contribution to the program goals than if each project were pursued separately. This enhanced productivity, or synergy, should be facilitated by the administrative and physical organization of the program, the composition of the research team, the selection of topics for study, coordinated scheduling of staff and support services, economies achieved through consolidated management, and in other ways as appropriate to the particular Program. Individual research projects should also each be of high scientific and technical merit.
The leaders of the individual research projects and cores
should be experienced, independent and productive investigators. They should
evidence stature and leadership, or a potentially strong leadership role, in
their respective fields and be adept at working with a multi-disciplinary
team or a team with expertise in several specialized areas within a specific
discipline. The research project lead has responsibility for the
scientific, administrative, budgetary, and operational aspects of the research
project and for coordination with the PD/PI and other core/research project
leads. A range of expertise relevant to the Program goals should be
present. The application should demonstrate past productive
collaborations of the research team(s) or otherwise provide evidence of a
strong collaborative environment for the proposed Program. All
investigators must contribute to and share the responsibilities of fulfilling
the Program goals and objectives.
Investigators who are considering pursuing a collaborative approach to a high-priority research problem are strongly encouraged to contact NIDA Scientific/Research staff early in the process to discuss a potential application. The discussion could include the choice of funding mechanism, relevance of the topic to NIDA’s mission, goals, and research priorities, planned budget, and the scope and approach of the proposed research.
Special Considerations
HIV/AIDS Counseling and Testing Policy for the National Institute on Drug Abuse: In light of recent significant advances in rapid testing for HIV and in effective treatments for HIV, NIDA has revised its 2001 policy on HIV counseling and testing. NIDA-funded researchers are strongly encouraged to provide and/or refer research subjects to HIV risk reduction education and education about the benefits of HIV treatment, counseling and testing, referral to treatment, and other appropriate interventions to prevent acquisition and transmission of HIV. This policy applies to all NIDA funded research conducted domestically or internationally. For more information see https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-DA-07-013.html.
National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse Recommended Guidelines for the Administration of Drugs to Human Subjects: The National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse (NACDA) recognizes the importance of research involving the administration of drugs with abuse potential, and dependence or addiction liability, to human subjects. Potential applicants are encouraged to obtain and review these recommendations of Council before submitting an application that will administer compounds to human subjects. The guidelines are available on NIDA's Web site at http://www.drugabuse.gov/funding/clinical-research/nacda-guidelines-administration-drugs-to-human-subjects
Points to Consider Regarding Tobacco Industry Funding of NIDA Applicants: The National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse (NACDA) encourages NIDA and its grantees to consider the points it has set forth with regard to existing or prospective sponsored research agreements with tobacco companies or their related entities and the impact of acceptance of tobacco industry funding on NIDA's credibility and reputation within the scientific community. Please see http://www.drugabuse.gov/about-nida/advisory-boards-groups/national-advisory-council-drug-abuse-nacda/council-statements/points-to-consider-regarding- for details.
Data Harmonization for Substance Abuse and Addiction via the PhenX Toolkit: NIDA strongly encourages investigators involved in human-subjects studies to employ a common set of tools and resources that will promote the collection of comparable data across studies and to do so by incorporating the measures from the Core and Specialty collections, which are available in the Substance Abuse and Addiction Collection of the PhenX Toolkit (www.phenxtoolkit.org). Please see NOT-DA-12-008 (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-DA-12-008.html) for further details.
See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.
Grant: A support mechanism providing money, property, or both to an eligible entity to carry out an approved project or activity.
New
Renewal - Starting with new and renewal P01 grants funded in fiscal year 2013,
only one more renewal will be allowed.
Resubmission
Revision
The OER Glossary and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on these application types.
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 maximum project period is 5 years.
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made in response to this FOA.
Higher Education Institutions
The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:
o Hispanic-serving Institutions
o Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
o Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs)
o Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions
o Asian American Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISIs)
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
For-Profit Organizations
Governments
Other
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are
not eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are eligible to
apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed.
Applicant Organizations
Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as possible. The NIH Policy on Late Submission of Grant Applications states that failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission.
Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))
All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account. PD(s)/PI(s) should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate their existing account with the applicant organization in eRA Commons.If the PD/PI is also the organizational Signing Official, they must have two distinct eRA Commons accounts, one for each role. Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.
Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with his/her organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for NIH support.
For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
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. This means that the NIH will not accept:
A button to access the online ASSIST system is available in Part 1 of this FOA. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution.
Most applicants will use NIH’s ASSIST system to prepare and submit applications through Grants.gov to NIH. Applications prepared and submitted using applicant systems capable of submitting electronic multi-project applications to Grants.gov will also be accepted.
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Multi-Project Instructions for the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, including Supplemental Grant Application Instructions except where instructed in this funding opportunity announcement to do otherwise and where instructions in the Application Guide are directly related to the Grants.gov downloadable forms currently used with most NIH opportunities. Conformance to the requirements in the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
For information on Application Submission and Receipt, visit Frequently Asked Questions Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications.
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: [email protected]
Applicants are encouraged to send the letter of intent by email to the email address above but as an alternative the letter may also be sent to:
Office of Extramural Policy and Review
National Institute on Drug Abuse/NIH/DHHS
6001 Executive Boulevard, Suite 4243, MSC 9550
Bethesda, MD 20892-9550
Component Types Available in ASSIST |
Research Strategy/Program Plan Page Limits |
Overall |
12 |
Admin Core (Use for Administrative Core) |
6 |
Core (Use for Scientific Cores) |
6 |
Project |
12 |
Additional page limits described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
The following section supplements the instructions found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, and should be used for preparing a multi-component application.
Revision applications must include an Overall component and the components that are affected by the revision. Therefore, the component requirements listed below may not apply to the revision application.
The application should consist of the following components:
When preparing your application in ASSIST, use Component Type Overall .
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.
Complete entire form.
Note: Human Embryonic Stem Cell lines from other components should be repeated in cell line table in Overall component.
Follow standard instructions.
Enter primary site only.
A summary of Project/Performance Sites in the Overall section of the assembled application image in eRA Commons compiled from data collected in the other components will be generated upon submission.
Include only the Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) and any multi-PDs/PIs (if applicable to this FOA) for the entire application.
A summary of Senior/Key Persons followed by their Biographical Sketches in the Overall section of the assembled application image in eRA Commons will be generated upon submission.
The only budget information included in the Overall component is the Estimated Project Funding section of the SF424 (R&R) Cover.
A budget summary in the Overall section of the assembled application image in eRA Commons compiled from detailed budget data collected in the other components will be generated upon submission.
Introduction to Application: For Resubmission and Revision applications, an Introduction to Application is required in the Overall component.
Specific Aims: Describe the specific aims for the Program as a whole.
Research Strategy: Provide information on the Program as a whole. Discuss the role and responsibilities of the Program Principal Investigator/Project Director; discuss the research team. Discuss the synergy of and rationale for the Program cores and projects (i.e., the extent to which the integration and parallel pursuit of the projects and cores are likely to advance this research area to a greater extent than could be achieved as separate projects). Aspects of synergy include: interactions and links among components to show that the impact of a coordinated program project goes beyond the impact of individual research projects and cores; depth and breadth of expertise and experience not normally present in an individual research project grant; components which, as a group, enhance cost-effectiveness and quality control in resource utilization; a clear integration of program project components to an overarching theme that integrates and focuses the program project; an essential relationship of each research project and core components to the theme; plans for communication, coordination, and collaboration among research project investigators; potential of individual projects to inform the design and interpretation of other projects.
If the Program involves clinical research, concisely describe overall plans for: 1) protection of human subjects; 2) inclusion of minorities, sexes/genders, and children, justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed; and, 3) the data in support of feasibility of recruiting sufficient participants from the proposed population(s) to achieve the stated objectives. Note that details of the protections of human subjects and the inclusion of minorities, sexes/genders, and children must be provided in the specific Research Plan form attachments in the relevant components.
For renewal applications only, include a progress report which summarizes the aims and accomplishments of the Program during the prior funding period. See the SF 424 (R&R) instructions for details about what to include in the progress report. If a project from the prior funding period is being discontinued, explain in the overall progress report.
Progress Report Publication List: For renewal applications, provide a list of all publications that arose from Program during the prior funding period. It is encouraged that this be arranged as a table in which publications are organized based on the following categories: a) overall Program (for publications that were not clearly related to a given project); b) each Project; c) each Core (as appropriate). If the same publication appears in both a Project and a Core, make sure this evident in the table.
Letters of Support: Attach letters of support relevant to the Program as a whole. Letters of support relevant to specific projects or cores should be attached in the relevant Project or Core Research Plan form.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following modification:
All applications submitted are expected to comply with the NIH Genomic Data Sharing Policy as detailed in https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-14-124.html, as applicable Investigators are expected to deposit selectively bred strains in an appropriate repository and register these strains and any research resources supported by this FOA in the Neuroscience Information Framework http://scicrunch.com/resources. RRIDs associated with these research resources are to be used in any publication.
Investigators are expected to deposit sequence data in a public data base. The location of the public data base, where the sequence data will be deposited, should be identified.
All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, should address and submit a Data Sharing Plan.
Appendix: Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
When preparing your application in ASSIST, use Component Type Insert Name.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.
SF424 (R&R) Cover (Admin Core)
Complete only the following fields:
PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement (Admin Core)
Enter Human Embryonic Stem Cells in each relevant component.
Research & Related Other Project Information (Admin Core)
Human Subjects: Answer only the Are Human Subjects Involved? and 'Is the Project Exempt from Federal regulations? questions.
Vertebrate Animals: Answer only the Are Vertebrate Animals Used? question.
Project Narrative: Do not complete. Note: ASSIST screens will show an asterisk for this attachment indicating it is required. However, eRA systems only enforce this requirement in the Overall component and applications will not receive an error if omitted in other components.
Project /Performance Site Location(s) (Admin Core)
List all performance sites that apply to the specific component.
Note: The Project Performance Site form allows up to 300 sites, prior to using additional attachment for additional entries.
Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Admin Core)
Budget (Admin Core)
Budget forms appropriate for the specific component will be included in the application package.
Note: The R&R Budget form included in many of the component types allows for up to 100 Senior/Key Persons in section A and 100 Equipment Items in section C prior to using attachments for additional entries. All other SF424 (R&R) instructions apply.
PHS 398 Research Plan (Admin Core)
Introduction to Application: For Resubmission and Revision applications, an Introduction to Application is allowed for each component.
Specific Aims: Describe the goals of the Administrative Core
Research Strategy: The Research Strategy should describe how the Administrative Core will provide (a) an overall programmatic structure that effectively promotes scientific interactions and provides for internal quality control of research and publications, and (b) an administrative organization that has clear lines of authority, is managed efficiently and cost effectively, and enables effective use and leverage of resources. Depending on the nature of the Program, the Core may include the use of (a) an external advisory structure (e.g., DSMB) that is charged to provide appropriate and objective advice and evaluation, as needed, to the PD/PI; and (b) an internal advisory, decision-making, and priority setting process to support the activities of the Program.
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.
Appendix: Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
PHS Inclusion Enrollment Report (Admin Core)
When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions for completing PHS Inclusion Enrollment Report as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
When preparing your application in ASSIST, use Component Type Core.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.
SF424 (R&R) Cover (Core )
Complete only the following fields:
PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement (Core )
Enter Human Embryonic Stem Cells in each relevant component.
Research & Related Other Project Information (Core )
Human Subjects: Answer only the Are Human Subjects Involved? and 'Is the Project Exempt from Federal regulations? questions.
Vertebrate Animals: Answer only the Are Vertebrate Animals Used? question.
Project Narrative: Do not complete. Note: ASSIST screens will show an asterisk for this attachment indicating it is required. However, eRA systems only enforce this requirement in the Overall component and applications will not receive an error if omitted in other components.
Project /Performance Site Location(s) (Core)
List all performance sites that apply to the specific component.
Note: The Project Performance Site form allows up to 300 sites, prior to using additional attachment for additional entries.
Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Core)
Budget (Core)
Budget forms appropriate for the specific component will be included in the application package.
Note: The R&R Budget form included in many of the component types allows for up to 100 Senior/Key Persons in section A and 100 Equipment Items in section C prior to using attachments for additional entries. All other SF424 (R&R) instructions apply.
PHS 398 Research Plan (Core)
Introduction to Application: For Resubmission and Revision applications, an Introduction to Application is allowed for each component.
Research Strategy: Clearly describe the Core in terms of the services and resources to be provided to other program project components. Issues to be addressed include quality control, procedures for selecting projects that use the core, cost effectiveness, and increased efficiency.
Core resources should not duplicate resources already available to Center investigators; however, fee-for-service core elements are acceptable with adequate justification.
For renewal applications, discuss progress in this core during the prior funding period and rationale for any changes.
Letters of Support: Include letters of support relevant to the core only:
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following modification:
All applications submitted are expected to comply with the NIH Genomic Data Sharing Policy as detailed in https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-14-124.html, as applicable Investigators are expected to deposit selectively bred strains in an appropriate repository and register these strains and any research resources supported by this FOA in the Neuroscience Information Framework http://scicrunch.com/resources. RRIDs are to be used in any publication.
Investigators are expected to deposit sequence data in a public data base. The location of the public data base, where the sequence data will be deposited, should be identified.
All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, should address a Data Sharing Plan.
Appendix: Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
PHS Inclusion Enrollment Report (Core)
When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions for completing PHS Inclusion Enrollment Report as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Project
When preparing your application in ASSIST, use Component Type Project'.
Research may focus on any area of NIDA's mission, but must bear an essential relationship to the program project’s integrating theme. Each research project must interact with at least one other research project of the program project and may interact with one or more cores.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.
SF424 (R&R) Cover (Project)
Complete only the following fields:
PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement (Project)
Enter Human Embryonic Stem Cells in each relevant component.
Research & Related Other Project Information (Project)
Human Subjects: Answer only the Are Human Subjects Involved? and 'Is the Project Exempt from Federal regulations? questions.
Vertebrate Animals: Answer only the Are Vertebrate Animals Used? question.
Project Narrative: Do not complete. Note: ASSIST screens will show an asterisk for this attachment indicating it is required. However, eRA systems only enforce this requirement in the Overall component and applications will not receive an error if omitted in other components.
Project /Performance Site Location(s) (Project)
List all performance sites that apply to the specific component.
Note: The Project Performance Site form allows up to 300 sites, prior to using additional attachment for additional entries.
Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Project)
Budget (Project)
Budget forms appropriate for the specific component will be included in the application package.
Note: The R&R Budget form included in many of the component types allows for up to 100 Senior/Key Persons in section A and 100 Equipment Items in section C prior to using attachments for additional entries. All other SF424 (R&R) instructions apply.
PHS 398 Research Plan (Project)
Introduction to Application: For Resubmission and Revision applications, an Introduction to Application is allowed for each component.
Specific Aims: Describe the specific aims for the Project
Research Strategy: Describe the research strategy for the project. Even though it is required that the three or more research projects included in the program be synergistic, this section should focus on this specific project and not the potential synergy between this project and the other projects and/or cores. Synergy should be discussed in the Overall Component.
Each research project must interact with at least one other research project of the program project and may interact with one or more cores. Individual research projects should describe the interactions with other research projects and cores of the program project and explain the expected impact of those interactions on the overall goals of the program project.
For renewal applications, include a Progress Report that discusses the progress in this Project during the prior funding period, and description of and rationale for significant changes that may have occurred during the prior funding period.
Progress Report Publication List: Do not complete. This information is requested in the Overall component.
Letters of Support: Attach letters of support relevant to the specific research project.
Resources Sharing. All applications submitted are expected to comply with the NIH Genomic Data Sharing Policy as detailed in https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-14-124.html, as applicable. Investigators are expected to deposit selectively bred strains in an appropriate repository and register these strains and any research resources supported by this FOA in the Neuroscience Information Framework http://scicrunch.com/resources. RRIDs are to be used in any publication.
Investigators are expected to deposit sequence data in a public data base. The location of the public data base, where the sequence data will be deposited, should be identified.
All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, should address a Data Sharing Plan
Appendix: Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide
PHS Inclusion Enrollment Report (Project)
When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions for completing PHS Inclusion Enrollment Report as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
See Part 1. Section III.1 for information regarding the requirement for obtaining a unique entity identifier and for completing and maintaining active registrations in System for Award Management (SAM), NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code (if applicable), eRA Commons, and Grants.gov.
Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission. When a submission date falls on a weekend or Federal holiday, the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day.
Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies) using ASSIST or other electronic submission systems. Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH’s electronic system for grants administration. NIH and Grants.gov systems check the application against many of the application instructions upon submission. Errors must be corrected and a changed/corrected application must be submitted to Grants.gov on or before the application due date and time. If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late. Applications that miss the due date and time are subjected to the NIH Policy on Late Application Submission.
Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.
Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.
For information on how your application will be automatically assembled for review and funding consideration after submission go to: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/ElectronicReceipt/files/Electronic_Multi-project_Application_Image_Assembly.pdf.
Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.
For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit Applying Electronically. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Guidelines for Applicants Experiencing System Issues. For assistance with application submission, contact the Application Submission Contacts in Section VII.
Important reminders:
All PD(s)/PI(s) and component Project Leads must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile Component of the SF424(R&R) Application Package. Failure to register in the Commons and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the successful submission of an electronic application to NIH.
The applicant organization must ensure that the DUNS number it provides on the application is the same number used in the organization’s profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Management (SAM). Additional information may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
See more tips for avoiding common errors.
Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with application instructions by the Center for Scientific Review, NIH. Applications that are incomplete or non-compliant will not be reviewed.
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.
Applicants are required to follow our Post Submission Application Materials policy.
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. As part of the NIH mission, all applications submitted to the NIH in support of biomedical and behavioral research are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.
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).
In assigning the impact score for the application as a whole, although primary emphasis will be placed on scientific merit of the research projects, the assessment of scientific synergy (i.e., the extent to which the integration and parallel pursuit of the projects and cores are likely to advance this research area to a greater extent than could be achieved as separate projects) should contribute significantly to the overall score.
This will include the following:
Are there sufficient interactions and links among components to show that the impact of a coordinated program project goes beyond the impact of individual research projects and cores? Does the approach taken make use of a depth and breadth of expertise and experience not normally present in an individual research project grant? Do the components, as a group, contribute resources that enhance cost-effectiveness and quality control in resource utilization? Is there a clear integration of program project components to an overarching theme that integrates and focuses the program project, as well as the presence of an essential relationship of each research project and core component to the theme? What are the nature, scope, and effectiveness of the plans for communication, coordination, and collaboration among research project investigators? What is the potential that results from individual projects to inform the design and interpretation of other projects?
Does the application clearly demonstrate the feasibility of the organizational structure to support research and interaction? Is there evidence of a collaborative integrated research approach and effort? Does the organizational structure have clear lines of authority that allow for efficient and cost-effective management and allocation of funds, as well as leveraging of resources to enable additional or future work? Are there arrangements for internal quality control of research, publications, and grant applications? Is there an appropriate, fully described internal process that allows for priority setting and decision making to sustain the Program? Is there appropriate specification of criteria and processes for determining and sustaining individual participation in the project based on productivity, research direction, and overall contribution?
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 there a strong scientific premise for the project? 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 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? Does the PD/PI have the ability to lead a scientific program as documented by scientific achievements, productivity, stature in a relevant field, and planned activities? Does the PD/PI have the ability to lead administrative and operational aspects of the program project, as noted by administrative skills, achievements? Is there adequate commitment of time and effort for the research and administrative functions of the program project? As a group, are research project and core investigators well suited to the components? Is there evidence of multidisciplinary backgrounds and interests?
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?
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the cores and projects? 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 children, justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?
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.
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit of each proposed research project, and give a separate numerical score for each criterion, as well as an overall impact score for the project. A project does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.
Significance
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is there a strong scientific premise for the project? 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?
Investigator(s)
Are the Project leader 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, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership and research track records appropriate for the project?
Innovation
Does the proposed project 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?
Approach
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the 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 children, justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
Environment
Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?
Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the Administrative Core 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 core proposed).
Reviewers will consider each of the criteria below in the determination of scientific and technical merit.
Is the administrative and organizational structure appropriate and adequate to the attainment of the objective(s) of the proposed program? Is the management plan for fiscal accountability and communication within the program appropriate? Are the plans for coordination, problem identification and resolution, and the establishment of a strong collaborative environment for the program appropriate? Are the experience, level of commitment, and availability of the Administrative Core Leader and administrative staff adequate to manage the program?
Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the Scientific Core 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 core proposed).
Reviewers will consider each of the criteria below in the determination of scientific and technical merit.
Is provision of resources and core services for the individual Research Projects critical and justified? Is the relationship of a scientific core to the central focus of the overall program strong? Is the quality of the relevant facilities or services provided and criteria for prioritization and usage appropriate? Are the qualifications, competence, and commitment of the Core Leader and key personnel appropriate?
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.
For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the six 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 six 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 children to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.
The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following criteria: (1) description of proposed procedures involving animals, including species, strains, ages, sex, and total number to be used; (2) justifications for the use of animals versus alternative models and for the appropriateness of the species proposed; (3) interventions to minimize discomfort, distress, pain and injury; and (4) justification for euthanasia method if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. Reviewers will assess the use of chimpanzees as they would any other application proposing the use of vertebrate animals. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section.
Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.
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. Only one renewal will be allowed.
For Revisions, the committee will consider the appropriateness of the proposed expansion of the scope of the project. If the Revision application relates to a specific line of investigation presented in the original application that was not recommended for approval by the committee, then the committee will consider whether the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group are adequate and whether substantial changes are clearly evident.
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items, and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.
Not Applicable
Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).
Reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources, are reasonable: 1) Data Sharing Plan; 2) Sharing Model Organisms; and 3) Genomic Data Sharing Plan .
For projects involving key biological and/or chemical resources, reviewers will comment on the brief plans proposed for identifying and ensuring the validity of those resources.
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s), convened by CSR 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:
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 National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) via the eRA Commons. Refer to Part 1 for dates for peer review, advisory council review, and earliest start date.
Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via email to the grantee’s business official.
Awardees must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.5. Funding Restrictions. Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs.
Any application awarded in response to this FOA will be subject to terms and conditions found on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website. This includes any recent legislation and policy applicable to awards that is highlighted on this website.
All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities. More information is provided at Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants.
Recipients of federal financial assistance (FFA) from HHS must administer their programs in compliance with federal civil rights law. This means that recipients of HHS funds must ensure equal access to their programs without regard to a person’s race, color, national origin, disability, age and, in some circumstances, sex and religion. This includes ensuring your programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency. HHS recognizes that research projects are often limited in scope for many reasons that are nondiscriminatory, such as the principal investigator’s scientific interest, funding limitations, recruitment requirements, and other considerations. Thus, criteria in research protocols that target or exclude certain populations are warranted where nondiscriminatory justifications establish that such criteria are appropriate with respect to the health or safety of the subjects, the scientific study design, or the purpose of the research.
In accordance with the statutory provisions contained in Section 872 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), NIH awards will be subject to the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) requirements. FAPIIS requires Federal award making officials to review and consider information about an applicant in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS) prior to making an award. An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through FAPIIS and comment on any information about itself that a Federal agency previously entered and is currently in FAPIIS. The Federal awarding agency will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to other information in FAPIIS, in making a judgement about the applicant’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 45 CFR Part 75.205 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants. This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.
For additional guidance regarding how the provisions apply to NIH grant programs, please contact the Scientific/Research Contact that is identified in Section VII under Agency Contacts of this FOA. HHS provides general guidance to recipients of FFA on meeting their legal obligation to take reasonable steps to provide meaningful access to their programs by persons with limited English proficiency. Please see http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/resources/laws/revisedlep.html. The HHS Office for Civil Rights also provides guidance on complying with civil rights laws enforced by HHS. Please see http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/understanding/section1557/index.html; and http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/understanding/index.html. Recipients of FFA also have specific legal obligations for serving qualified individuals with disabilities. Please see http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/understanding/disability/index.html. Please contact the HHS Office for Civil Rights for more information about obligations and prohibitions under federal civil rights laws at http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/office/about/rgn-hqaddresses.html or call 1-800-368-1019 or TDD 1-800-537-7697. Also note it is an HHS Departmental goal to ensure access to quality, culturally competent care, including long-term services and supports, for vulnerable populations. For further guidance on providing culturally and linguistically appropriate services, recipients should review the National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health and Health Care at http://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=2&lvlid=53.
Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award
Not Applicable
When multiple years are involved, awardees 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 progress report, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Transparency Act), includes a requirement for awardees of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later. All awardees of applicable NIH grants and cooperative agreements are required to report to the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at www.fsrs.gov on all subawards over $25,000. See the NIH Grants Policy Statement for additional information on this reporting requirement.
In accordance with the regulatory requirements provided at 45 CFR 75.113 and Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75, recipients that have currently active Federal grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from all Federal awarding agencies with a cumulative total value greater than $10,000,000 for any period of time during the period of performance of a Federal award, must report and maintain the currency of information reported in the System for Award Management (SAM) about civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings in connection with the award or performance of a Federal award that reached final disposition within the most recent five-year period. The recipient must also make semiannual disclosures regarding such proceedings. Proceedings information will be made publicly available in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS). This is a statutory requirement under section 872 of Public Law 110-417, as amended (41 U.S.C. 2313). As required by section 3010 of Public Law 111-212, all information posted in the designated integrity and performance system on or after April 15, 2011, except past performance reviews required for Federal procurement contracts, will be publicly available. Full reporting requirements and procedures are found in Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75 Award Term and Conditions for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity
and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
eRA Service Desk (Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons
registration, submitting and tracking an application, documenting system problems
that threaten submission by the due date, post submission issues)
Finding Help Online: https://grants.nih.gov/support/ (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions
regarding Grants.gov registration and submission, downloading forms and
application packages)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: [email protected]
GrantsInfo (Questions regarding application instructions and
process, finding NIH grant resources)
Email: [email protected] (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-945-7573
Jag Khalsa, Ph.D.
Division of Therapeutics and Medical Consequences
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Telephone: 301-443-2159
Email: [email protected]
Meyer D. Glantz, Ph.D.
Division of Epidemiology, Services and Prevention Research
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Telephone: 301-443-6504
Email: [email protected]
Jonathan D. Pollock, Ph.D.
Division of Neuroscience and Behavior
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Telephone: 301-435-1316
Email: [email protected]
Steven Grant, Ph.D.
Division of Neuroscience and Behavior
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Telephone: 301-443-4877
Email: [email protected]
Nitsa Rosenzweig, Ph.D.
Center for Scientific Review
Telephone Number: 301-404-7419
Email: [email protected]
Cheryl Nathaniel
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Telephone: 202-526-0108
Email: [email protected]
Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Part 75.