Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
and Human Services (HHS)
EXPIRED
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)
New
See Notices of Special Interest associated with this funding opportunity
December 21, 2023 - This PAR has been reissued PAR-24-086
September 27, 2023 - Notice of Intent to Publish a Funding Opportunity Announcement for Investigator Initiated Clinical Trials of Complementary and Integrative Interventions Delivered Remotely or via mHealth (R01 Clinical Trial Required). See Notice NOT-AT-24-014
NOT-AT-24-002 - Notice to Extend NCCIH's PAR-20-154, "Investigator Initiated Clinical Trials of Complementary and Integrative Interventions Delivered Remotely or via mHealth (R01 Clinical Trial Required)"
NOT-OD-23-012 Reminder: FORMS-H Grant Application Forms and Instructions Must be Used for Due Dates On or After January 25, 2023 - New Grant Application Instructions Now Available
NOT-OD-22-190 - Adjustments to NIH and AHRQ Grant Application Due Dates Between September 22 and September 30, 2022
October 28, 2021 - Reminder: FORMS-G Grant Application Forms & Instructions Must be Used for Due Dates On or After January 25, 2022 - New Grant Application Instructions Now Available. See Notice NOT-OD-22-018.
September 13, 2021 - Updates to the Non-Discrimination Legal Requirements for NIH Recipients. See Notice NOT-OD-21-181.
August 5, 2021 - New NIH "FORMS-G" Grant Application Forms and Instructions Coming for Due Dates on or after January 25, 2022. See Notice NOT-OD-21-169.
August 5, 2021 - Update: Notification of Upcoming Change in Federal-wide Unique Entity Identifier Requirements. See Notice NOT-OD-21-170
April 20, 2021 - Expanding Requirement for eRA Commons IDs to All Senior/Key Personnel. See Notice NOT-OD-21-109
See Notices of Special Interest associated with this funding opportunity.
None
93.213?
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) encourages applications for investigator-initiated fully remotely delivered and conducted clinical trials to assess the efficacy or effectiveness of complementary and integrative health interventions in NCCIH designated areas of high research priority. Applications submitted under this FOA are expected to propose a remotely delivered and conducted clinical trial with no in-person contact between research staff and study participants and may utilize mHealth tools or technologies. To justify the proposed remotely delivered efficacy or effectiveness clinical trial, applications must have sufficient preliminary data that includes: demonstration of feasibility of remote recruitment and accrual of participants; demonstration of participant adherence to the intervention as well as retention of participants throughout the study; completion of final data collection from any related studies; demonstration of the safety of the intervention; and evidence that the intervention has promise of clinical benefit.
Applicants are encouraged to contact the appropriate NCCIH Scientific/Research contact for the area of science for which they are planning to develop an application prior to submitting to this FOA.
March 30, 2020
Not Applicable?
Standard dates apply.
The first standard due date for this FOA is June 5, 2020.
All applications are due by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. All types of non-AIDS applications allowed for this funding opportunity announcement are due on the listed date(s).
Applicants are encouraged to apply early to allow adequate time to make any corrections to errors found in the application during the submission process by the due date.
Standard AIDS dates apply.
All applications are due 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 the listed date(s).
The first AIDS due date is September 7, 2020.
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
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.
Background
The National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) is committed to rigorous investigation of promising complementary and integrative health interventions, including natural products and mind and body approaches. For the purposes of this funding opportunity announcement (FOA), natural product approaches include botanicals, dietary supplements, and probiotics; mind and body approaches include meditation approaches (e.g., mindfulness), hypnosis or guided imagery, meditative movement approaches (e.g., yoga, tai chi, qi gong), body-based approaches (e.g., progressive muscle relaxation, acupressure), music or art-based therapy, or a combination of these approaches (e.g., mindfulness based stress reduction). These approaches are often widely used by the public, and they are increasingly recognized to provide a complementary approach to symptom management (e.g., stress, chronic pain, mild depression, anxiety, etc) and health promotion.
Increasingly, researchers are incorporating mobile health (mHealth) technologies to remotely deliver interventions, including mindfulness, deep breathing, progressive muscle relaxation, and other complementary and integrative health interventions. These remotely delivered interventions may utilize phone delivery, app-based approaches, video delivery, web-based platforms, wearable devices and/or new technologies. The rapid expansion of mHealth technologies makes it possible to digitally transmit participant data from remote areas to centrally based researchers and interventionists, deliver feedback, and capture all interactions in a database.
The use of the pragmatic trial design is another method of conducting informative effectiveness studies that can be conducted with remote delivery of the intervention and data collection. This FOA will also support pragmatic clinical trials to assess the effectiveness of complementary and integrative health interventions when the trial design does not require in-person contact with study participants for delivery of the intervention or collection of data. For example, pragmatic trials may employ interventions that would not require research staff to interact directly with participants, such as clinician decision support tools embedded in the electronic health record, system changes within the health care system, or when complementary interventions are implemented and delivered within the health care setting. These types of pragmatic trials allow for investigators to coordinate delivery of the intervention centrally and capture of data from the electronic health record or via remote data collection.
Remotely delivered interventions such as pragmatic trials or trials utilizing mHealth tools/technologies have the potential to increase the reach of complementary and integrative health interventions, and many commercially available mHealth approaches already exist. However, rigorously designed research is needed to test the usefulness and safety of remotely delivered complementary and integrative health interventions for given conditions/disorders and/or health promotion. For clinical trials to address this need, they must be well designed and appropriately powered to test clinically relevant hypotheses. To that end, before proposing an efficacy or effectiveness clinical trial, it is necessary to conduct early-phase clinical trials to collect the multiple types of preliminary data needed to rigorously design a definitive clinical trial. For more information about what NCCIH recommends for the multi-staged process for intervention development and testing, see the NCCIH website (https://nccih.nih.gov/grants/funding/clinicaltrials).
This FOA is appropriate when there is a clear and compelling rationale, a rigorous empirical basis, strong feasibility and safety data, and scientific premise to conduct a large-scale remotely delivered efficacy, effectiveness, or pragmatic clinical trial.
Considerations for Selection of Study Design
For complementary and integrative interventions that either are or can be delivered in groups, investigators must provide a strong rationale for the choice among trial design options. If group delivery is selected, investigators should describe how this will be accomplished remotely in a secure fashion. The selection of study design should be guided by decisions about how best to deliver the intervention and by concerns regarding contamination and logistics.
In traditional randomized clinical trials (RCTs), individual participants are randomized to receive an intervention that is delivered individually (e.g., a specific natural product, individually delivered hypnosis, massage). When an intervention can be delivered in a group, there are several methods of randomizing participants. The first option is an individually randomized group treatment trial (IRGT, where individual participants are randomized to one of the interventions, but the intervention is delivered in small groups (e.g., Mindfulness based Stress Reduction or tai chi classes). The second option is a group-randomized trial (GRT), also called a cluster randomized trial (cRCT), where groups of participants are randomized to study conditions, often defined by their workplace, school, primary care provider, or community. In cRCTs, the intervention provided to the randomized groups can be delivered individually, in small groups, or the entire randomized group.
The study biostatistician will need to consider how the chosen study design led to the proposed data analyses and sample size estimations. The justification should include discussion of the positive intraclass correlation expected in data obtained from participants in the same groups or clusters (IRGT, GRT, or cRCT). In general, these types of studies need to consider how the data analyses and sample size addressed the extra variation in the data and degrees of freedom available to estimate that extra variation. Failure to account for this variable in sample size calculations can result in underpowered studies.
Overview of NCCIH Clinical Trials Research Funding Opportunities
NCCIH has designed its Clinical Trials Program to support a wide range of investigator-initiated studies with funding mechanisms tailored to address different scientific questions and levels of study complexity from early stage discovery research through large scale efficacy, effectiveness, or pragmatic clinical trials. This pipeline of research is supported under a range of funding opportunities that are detailed on the NCCIH Clinical Trials Funding webpage (https://nccih.nih.gov/grants/funding/clinicaltrials). Briefly, funding options include:
Research Objectives of Remotely Delivered mHealth Complementary and Integrative Health Interventions (R01)
This FOA supports remotely delivered clinical trials (e.g., efficacy, effectiveness or pragmatic trials) to study the effects of complementary and integrative health interventions in NCCIH-designated areas of high research priority. Proposed clinical trials may utilize a design anywhere along the continuum between explanatory and pragmatic. For this FOA, pragmatic trials are considered those that test an intervention under the usual clinical conditions in which it will be applied, while explanatory trials do so under more idealized circumstances. The trial design should be appropriate for the study question.
For this FOA, the proposed trial must study an intervention that can be delivered in a fully remote manner and all data collected remotely (i.e., no in-person contact between research staff and study participants). The application must propose to recruit a representative sample for the population and condition of interest, and conduct all study activities, including recruitment, intervention delivery, and data collection, remotely. Applications to this FOA should be based on a rationale for the need for a fully remotely delivered design as opposed to a multi-site in-person clinical trial. For study designs that require in-person participant contact, other funding mechanisms are available (https://nccih.nih.gov/grants/funding/clinicaltrials). Trials supported under this FOA are expected to contribute to the evidence base for important health matters of relevance to the research mission of NCCIH. In addition to scientific relevance and excellence, these clinical trials are expected to be conducted with a high degree of efficiency, with streamlined administrative procedures wherever possible. These trials are expected to achieve the Phase III trial requirements of NIH (see https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/glossary-ct.htm and https://grants.nih.gov/policy/inclusion/women-and-minorities.htm).
For applications that propose the use of a dietary supplement, drug, or device as part of the intervention, the applicants must contact the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) prior to applying to determine whether an Investigational New Drug (IND) or an Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) application is necessary for the proposed clinical research.
Investigators are strongly encouraged to review the NCCIH Clinical Research Toolbox (https://nccih.nih.gov/grants/toolbox) to learn more about NCCIH's policies for clinical research and to review our guidelines and sample templates. Clinical trials supported by this FOA will have to adhere to all NIH Policies on clinical trials (https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials.htm).
It is strongly recommended that investigators contact the NCCIH Scientific/Research contact to discuss at an early stage the development of a concept for a given clinical study. The Scientific/Research contact can provide feedback on whether a given concept is well-aligned with NCCIH research priorities and whether the available preliminary data appear sufficient for a given phase of a study.
Preliminary Data Requirement
The following preliminary data from previous human studies (preferably published in the peer-reviewed literature) on the specific intervention utilizing the same remote delivery mode and in the same population with the same condition as proposed in the current application will provide a strong justification for the proposed work:
In addition, for applications utilizing a natural product, the following preliminary data from human studies on the same product and specific formulation as proposed in the current application are required:
NCCIH acknowledges that for some conditions, it may be impossible or impractical to directly measure the biological impact of a natural product. In these circumstances, the study should be justified by: (1) a clear rationale for why studying a biological signature in human participants is impossible or impractical; (2) potentially proposing other objective, reproducible measures, that may be proxy to, or indicative of a biological or behavioral effect for the natural product; and (3) strong compelling preliminary data to warrant further study of a natural product in clinical studies. In these situations, investigators are also encouraged to contact NCCIH Scientific/Research staff to determine whether this FOA is the appropriate funding opportunity for the proposed clinical trial.
In addition, for applications utilizing a mind and body approach, it is highly desirable, though not required that:
NCCIH Priorities for Clinical Trials of Mind and Body Interventions
As NCCIH's mind and body clinical research portfolio matures, NCCIH has identified targeted areas of investigation. For this FOA, applications involving remotely delivered mind and body interventions will be considered of high programmatic priority if they meet the following two criteria:
NCCIH Priorities for Clinical Trials of Natural Products
NCCIH has identified targeted areas of high program priority for clinical trials on natural products. Focus is on management of conditions for which natural products are used by the public and where there is evidence of postulated mechanism of action. For this FOA, NCCIH considers the following two general topic areas to have high program priority:
NCCIH encourages applications for this FOA that meet the above criteria for either mind and body interventions and/or natural products interventions and also address health disparities, address symptom management in patients with HIV/AIDS, and/or utilize special populations such as older adults, children, under-represented minorities, individuals in the military, or veterans.
Applications proposing research topics not identified above as high programmatic priority will be considered of lesser or low programmatic priority, which will significantly influence programmatic relevance and reduce the likelihood of funding.
Clinical Trials Not Supported by this FOA
The following types of clinical trials are not intended to be supported by this FOA and applications proposing such clinical trials will not be considered for funding:
Specific Areas of Research Interest
Applicants are strongly encouraged to consult with the NCCIH Scientific/Research contacts for the area of science for which they are planning to develop an application prior to submitting to this FOA. Early contact provides an opportunity for NCCIH staff to discuss the scope and goals, and to provide information and guidanceGrant: A support mechanism providing money, property, or both to an eligible entity to carry out an approved project or activity.
The OER Glossary and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on these application types. Only those application types listed here are allowed for this FOA.
Need help determining whether you are doing a clinical trial?
The number of awards is contingent upon NIH appropriations and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
The scope of the proposed project should determine the project period. The maximum project period is 5 years.
Higher Education Institutions
The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
For-Profit Organizations
Governments
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are not eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed.
Applicant organizations
Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as possible. The NIH Policy on Late Submission of Grant Applications states that failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission.
Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))
All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account. PD(s)/PI(s) should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate their existing account with the applicant organization in eRA Commons. If the PD/PI is also the organizational Signing Official, they must have two distinct eRA Commons accounts, one for each role. Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.
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.
The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time. This means that the NIH will not accept:
The application forms package specific to this opportunity must be accessed through ASSIST, Grants.gov Workspace or an institutional system-to-system solution. Links to apply using ASSIST or Grants.gov Workspace are available in Part 1 of this FOA. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution.
Note: Effective for due dates on or after January 25, 2023, the Data Management and Sharing (DMS) Plan will be attached in the Other Plan(s) attachment in FORMS-H and subsequent application forms packages. For due dates on or before January 24, 2023, the Data Sharing Plan and Genomic Data Sharing Plan GDS) will continue to be attached in the Resource Sharing Plan attachment in FORMS-G application forms packages.
The Principal Director(PD)/ Principal Investigator (PI) (or Multi-PDs/PIs) of the clinical trial must be experienced in the conduct of remotely delivered clinical trials and have expertise in the content area of the trial. The experience of all Key Personnel must be carefully documented. Most clinical trials will require a multidisciplinary team (clinician, statistician, data manager, study coordinator, etc.), and the application should reflect their roles and responsibilities in the design and implementation of the study protocol.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
The budget for the first year of the grant should reflect the implementation timeline.
If parts of the costs of the trial are to be provided by sources other than NIH, these contributions must be presented in detail in the budget justification. Include budget support for the publication and dissemination of findings.
Other Plan(s):
Note: Effective for due dates on or after January 25, 2023, the Data Management and Sharing Plan will be attached in the Other Plan(s) attachment in FORMS-H and subsequent application forms packages. For due dates on or before January 24, 2023, the Data Sharing Plan and Genomic Data Sharing Plan GDS) will continue to be attached in the Resource Sharing Plan attachment in FORMS-G application forms packages.
All applicants planning research (funded or conducted in whole or in part by NIH) that results in the generation of scientific data are required to comply with the instructions for the Data Management and Sharing Plan. All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, must address a Data Management and Sharing Plan.
The Research Strategy should be organized in a manner that will facilitate peer review. The body of the application must present an overview of the state of the science, current status and relevance of the trial, a discussion of the specific protocol, and the approach to data collection and analysis.
The following criteria must be addressed:
Significance: The significance of the proposed clinical trial and importance of the question must be clearly stated. It is particularly important that there be a discussion of how the trial will test the proposed hypotheses and why there is clinical equipoise. The application should make clear the need for and timeliness of the study, with emphasis on how the results will address an evidence gap and therefore advance our knowledge of theory and practice in this area. A discussion of the costs and benefits of the study should be included for evaluation of the trial's significance.
Innovation: Explain how the application challenges and seeks to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms.
Approach: The research approach section should include a description of the supporting data, clinical trial experience, the experimental approach, and a milestone plan. The application should provide justification for a single-site, remotely delivered design.
Supporting Data: The studies that led to the proposed clinical trial should be presented. Data from pilot studies that show the need for and the feasibility of the trial should also be presented. Additional supporting data from other research should be included so that the approach chosen is clearly justified and adequately framed. Applications must include the following preliminary data from human studies (preferably published in the literature):
In addition, for applications utilizing a natural product, the following preliminary data from human studies on the same product and specific formulation as proposed in the current application are required:
NCCIH acknowledges that for some conditions, it may be impossible or impractical to directly measure the biological impact of a natural product. In these circumstances, the study should be justified by: (1) a clear rationale for why studying a biological signature in human participants is impossible or impractical; (2) potentially proposing other objective, reproducible measures that may be proxy to or indicative of a biological or behavioral effect for the natural product; and (3) strong compelling preliminary data to warrant further study of a natural product in clinical studies. In these situations, investigators are also encouraged to contact NCCIH Scientific/Research staff to determine whether this R01 is the appropriate funding opportunity for the proposed clinical trial.
In addition, for applications utilizing a mind and body approach, it is highly desirable, though not required that:
Conceptualization and planning must have progressed to a stage sufficient to allow for an overall assessment of the likelihood of the success of the trial.
Experimental Approach: The proposed experimental approach should include an appropriate design and the rationale for the particular design chosen (e.g., pragmatic, explanatory, cluster-randomized). The experimental approach description should include:
Letters of Support
Letters of support from clinicians, clinical department chairs, and/or health care systems whose support is necessary to the successful conduct of the trial should be provided (if applicable). Applicants are also encouraged to include documentation of the commitment of any subcontractors and consultants. Letters of commitment must be co-signed by the business official of the collaborating center. In addition, if utilizing a natural product, a letter of support should document that sufficient supply of the natural product will be available for testing at the time of award, including expiration date; the supplier will meet CMC specifications; and the supplier will provide the data necessary for the investigator to adhere to NIH and FDA policies. Documentation should include a letter of agreement from the 3rd party supplying the natural product.
If parts of the costs of the trial are to be provided by sources other than NCCIH, provide Letter(s) of Support signed by an authorized representative.The following modifications also apply:
If you answered Yes to the question Are Human Subjects Involved? on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or Delayed Onset Study record.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Section 2 - Study Population Characteristics
2.4 Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children
Describe strategies for outreach to minorities and women.
2.5 Recruitment and Retention Plan
Describe the following: 1) the planned remote recruitment methods, including use of contact lists, databases or other pre-screening resources, advertisements, outreach, media / social media and referral networks or groups; 2) if there are known participant or study-related barriers to accrual or participation (based on literature or prior experience), please list these barriers and describe plans to address them to optimize success; 3) contingency plans for participant accrual if enrollment significantly lags behind accrual benchmarks; 4) participant retention and adherence strategies; and 5) possible competition from other trials for study participants; Investigators are encouraged to review the NCCIH Study Accrual and Retention Plan (https://nccih.nih.gov/grants/policies/SARP).
Applicants must provide strong evidence of the availability of appropriate institutional resources and suitable patient populations. Documentation of the availability of eligible participants must be provided. The application must provide relevant information that addresses the feasibility of recruiting a representative sample of eligible participants nationwide utilizing remote methods.
2.7 Study Timeline
Milestone Plan: The milestone plan should describe the key milestones that need to be met throughout the lifecycle of the clinical trial to ensure its success, the processes that will be used to reach the milestones, and a timetable identifying when each of these key milestones will be met.
All applicants must use the following definition of a milestone in their application: a scheduled event in the project timeline that signifies the completion of a major project stage or activity. Milestones must be relevant, achievable, and measurable. The research plan should include anticipated challenges to meeting milestones and propose potential mitigation or corrective actions strategies. Milestones should address overall recruitment and retention goals.
Milestones of particular interest that should be described in the application may include, but are not limited to, the following:
During the award phase, achievement of each milestone will need to be communicated to the NCCIH Program Officer listed on the Notice of Award. Award continuation, even during the period recommended for support, is conditional upon satisfactory progress. If, at any time, recruitment, as defined in the NCCIH Study Accrual and Retention Plan Policy, falls significantly below projections, or core milestones mutually agreed upon by the PD/PI and NCCIH, are not met, NCCIH may consider ending support and negotiating an orderly phase-out of the award. NCCIH retains, as an option, periodic external peer review of progress. NCCIH staff will closely monitor progress at all trial stages, including milestones, accrual, and safety.
Section 3 - Protection and Monitoring Plans
3.3 Data and Safety Monitoring Plan
In addition to the NIH application requirements for data and safety monitoring for clinical trials, NCCIH requires independent monitoring for research involving human subjects. Applicants should refer to NIH’s policy on data and safety monitoring (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-038.html), as well as the NCCIH Guidelines for Data and Safety Monitoring (http://nccih.nih.gov/grants/policies/data-safety-monitoring). The data and safety monitoring plan must explicitly describe plans to remotely monitor participant safety with appropriate safeguards to minimize risk. The Independent Monitoring Committee (IMC) or Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) will have the responsibility to review interim and final data, and recommend whether the protocol should be modified, and, at each meeting, whether the study should be continued or should be terminated early. Thus, its ethical responsibilities, to the participants as well as to the integrity of the study, are of paramount importance to NCCIH. The IMC/DSMB will meet in person or by phone at least twice a year. Applicants should not appoint IMC/DSMB members in advance of the peer review, or even inquire about the interest of possible DSMB members, to avoid conflicts of interest in peer review.
Section 4 - Protocol Synopsis
4.6. Will the study use an FDA-Regulated intervention?
If the proposed clinical trial will use a device, natural product (such as botanical, herbal, dietary supplement, probiotic, vitamin, or mineral), or drug, this attachment should describe correspondence from the FDA indicating whether the proposed study will require an IND/IDE. Investigators should describe the process that will be used for attaining all necessary FDA or other applicable regulatory agency approvals necessary to the conduct of the trial and associated timeline. For trials using an FDA-regulated product that requires an IND/IDE application, the grant application must include evidence regarding the outcome of a pre-IND meeting, or other evidence of communication with FDA. If the protocol is conducted under a non-U.S. regulatory agency, the applicant should submit a plan for attaining those regulatory approvals. If the protocol is exempt from an IND/IDE, a copy of the exemption letter from the FDA should be provided as part of the PDF file attachment.
Section 5 - Other Clinical Trial-related Attachments
5.1 Other Clinical Trial-related Attachments
The following attachment must be included as a part of the application. Attachments permit expansion of certain elements that cannot be appropriately described in the Research Strategy. All attachments listed below must be provided or the application will not be peer reviewed.
Clinical Trial Experience
Applicants must provide a detailed table listing the characteristics of trials that demonstrate the experience of the study Key Personnel in trial coordination in the last 5 years. The table must be provided as an attachment called "Clinical Trial Experience.pdf" and must not exceed 3 pages. If applicants propose more than one clinical trial study and are submitting more than one study records, they must use unique file names for each study record (e.g. Clinical Trial Experience for Study Record 1.pdf , Clinical Trial Experience for Study Record 2.pdf , etc) to avoid errors uploading attachments.
The table columns should include:
Column A: clinical trial title
Column B: applicant's role in the trial
Column C: a brief description of the trial design
Column D: planned enrollment
Column E: actual enrollment
Column F: number of sites
Column G: whether the trial(s) were completed on schedule or not
Column H: publication reference(s)
Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start).All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Do not enter a delayed onset study.
See Part 1. Section III.1 for information regarding the requirement for obtaining a unique entity identifier and for completing and maintaining active registrations in System for Award Management (SAM), NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code (if applicable), eRA Commons, and Grants.gov
Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission. When a submission date falls on a weekend or Federal holiday, the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day.
Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies). Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, 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.
Specific to this FOA:
Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.
Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.
For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit How to Apply Application Guide. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Dealing with System Issues guidance. For assistance with application submission, contact the Application Submission Contacts in Section VII.
Important reminders:
All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile 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. See Section III of this FOA for information on registration requirements.
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. 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.
All post-submission materials must be received by the Scientific Review Officer (SRO) no later than 30 calendar days prior to the peer review meeting. In addition to the NIH policy allowed post-submission materials in NOT-OD-19-083, the follow post-submission materials are allowed:
Note: Effective for due dates on or after January 25, 2023, the Data Sharing Plan and Genomic Data Sharing Plan (GDS) as part of the Resource Sharing Plan will not be evaluated at time of review.
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. Applications submitted to the NIH in support of the NIH mission are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project rigorous? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
Are the scientific rationale and need for a clinical trial to test the proposed hypothesis or intervention well supported by preliminary data, clinical and/or preclinical studies, or information in the literature or knowledge of biological mechanisms? For trials focusing on clinical or public health endpoints, is this clinical trial necessary for testing the safety, efficacy or effectiveness of an intervention that could lead to a change in clinical practice, community behaviors or health care policy? For trials focusing on mechanistic, behavioral, physiological, biochemical, or other biomedical endpoints, is this trial needed to advance scientific understanding?
Specific to this FOA:
If the primary outcomes of the trial are achieved, how critical will the information be to addressing the evidence gap and advancing knowledge of theory and practice? Could results of the trial have a significant influence on clinical care and improve health? Is there sufficient demonstration for the presence of equipoise?
Is there adequate justification for a remotely delivered design? For pragmatic studies that integrate an intervention into health care delivery, how strong is the evidence of efficacy or effectiveness for the intervention? For studies that propose to improve adherence to established guidelines, how strong is the evidence for the guidelines that are being used? Is there adequate justification for the potential of study outcomes to provide clinically meaningful information to stakeholders?
Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or those in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?
With regard to the proposed leadership for the project, do the PD/PI(s) and key personnel have the expertise, experience, and ability to organize, manage and implement the proposed clinical trial and meet milestones and timelines? Do they have appropriate expertise in study coordination, data management and statistics? For a multicenter trial, is the organizational structure appropriate and does the application identify a core of potential center investigators and staffing for a coordinating center?
Specific to this FOA:
How well defined are their roles and responsibilities? How well does the application provide evidence of necessary expertise about the complementary and integrative health intervention, remote-delivery methods, and the study population? How strong is the evidence provided that the investigators will employ the appropriate personnel and strategies to recruit subjects and design/implement the remotely delivered clinical protocol? Does the investigative team have a track record of conducting, completing, and publishing the results of clinical trials?
In addition, for studies proposing pragmatic trials within health care systems: Do teams include appropriate collaborators from the participating health care systems? Do the PD(s)/PI(s) and Key Personnel have the necessary expertise in design and implementation of large-scale clinical studies within a health care system? For example, do they have expertise in using electronic health records for recruitment and outcomes assessment? Do the PD(s)/PI(s) have a track record of successful remote recruitment and retention in prior studies, investigative collaborations or partnerships with (within) health delivery organizations in conducting clinical studies within a health care system?
Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?
Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?
Does the design/research plan include innovative elements, as appropriate, that enhance its sensitivity, potential for information or potential to advance scientific knowledge or clinical practice?
Specific to this FOA:
Does the application include mechanisms for leveraging novel collaboration and study oversight strategies?
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have the investigators included plans to address weaknesses in the rigor of prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?
Does the application adequately address the following, if applicable:
Study Design
Is the study design justified and appropriate to address primary and secondary outcome variable(s)/endpoints that will be clear, informative and relevant to the hypothesis being tested? Is the scientific rationale/premise of the study based on previously well-designed preclinical and/or clinical research? Given the methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions, is the study design adequately powered to answer the research question(s), test the proposed hypothesis/hypotheses, and provide interpretable results? Is the trial appropriately designed to conduct the research efficiently? Are the study populations (size, gender, age, demographic group), proposed intervention arms/dose, and duration of the trial, appropriate and well justified?
Are potential ethical issues adequately addressed? Is the process for obtaining informed consent or assent appropriate? Is the eligible population available? Are the plans for recruitment outreach, enrollment, retention, handling dropouts, missed visits, and losses to follow-up appropriate to ensure robust data collection? Are the planned recruitment timelines feasible and is the plan to monitor accrual adequate? Has the need for randomization (or not), masking (if appropriate), controls, and inclusion/exclusion criteria been addressed? Are differences addressed, if applicable, in the intervention effect due to sex/gender and race/ethnicity?
Are the plans to standardize, assure quality of, and monitor adherence to, the trial protocol and data collection or distribution guidelines appropriate? Is there a plan to obtain required study agent(s)? Does the application propose to use existing available resources, as applicable?
Data Management and Statistical Analysis
Are planned analyses and statistical approach appropriate for the proposed study design and methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions? Are the procedures for data management and quality control of data adequate at clinical site(s) or at center laboratories, as applicable? Have the methods for standardization of procedures for data management to assess the effect of the intervention and quality control been addressed? Is there a plan to complete data analysis within the proposed period of the award?
In addition, for studies proposing pragmatic trials within health care systems: Are the projections for recruitment, ongoing engagement, attrition, and effect size estimations based on data in the proposed health care setting or similar settings? Is the degree of pragmatic aspects of the approaches, measures, design and outcomes well justified for the design elements of the proposed study? Will the results provide relevant information and adequate data for other potential adopting health care settings to determine applicability? Will rigorous controls be included in the design? Will broad but adequate eligibility criteria be used, as proposed? Can interventions be easily implemented? How will the approaches proposed overcome barriers to research in the health care system setting?
Specific to this FOA:
What strengths and weaknesses are there in the study design? How appropriately is the study designed to answer the research question, test the proposed hypothesis/hypotheses, and collect the necessary data? How efficient is the trial design? How strong is the evidence for equipoise? How well does the Clinical Protocol Synopsis describe the necessary elements of the clinical trial and how likely is it that the protocol can be implemented for a fully remotely delivered design? Is the complementary and integrative health intervention appropriately characterized? How well are the clinical outcome measures, dose/duration of intervention and follow up, appropriateness of inclusion/exclusion criteria, and sample size justified and explained? Did the applicant appropriate define the study population? How well does the Recruitment and Retention plan provide evidence that the accrual goals can be reached? Are there adequate plans to recruit a generalizable sample of participants utilizing remote methods? Are there plans for adverse events to be appropriately captured and monitored? Have the investigators described how they will follow Good Clinical Practices, Good Laboratory Practices, and Good Manufacturing Practices as appropriate?
Is there evidence of the ability of the investigators to: (1) enroll the proposed numbers, (2) deliver the intervention, and (3) collect and transmit data in an accurate and timely fashion, all with remote methods?
If the clinical trial is Phase III, does the application include all relevant data to assess whether or not the trial should include adequate numbers of subgroups of participants to allow for separate and adequately powered analyses?
If the project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, are the plans to address 1) the protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults), justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?
If proposed, are the administrative, data coordinating, enrollment and laboratory/testing centers, appropriate for the trial proposed?
Does the application adequately address the capability and ability to conduct the trial at the proposed site(s) or centers? Are the plans to add or drop enrollment centers, as needed, appropriate?
If international site(s) is/are proposed, does the application adequately address the complexity of executing the clinical trial?
If multi-sites/centers, is there evidence of the ability of the individual site or center to: (1) enroll the proposed numbers; (2) adhere to the protocol; (3) collect and transmit data in an accurate and timely fashion; and, (4) operate within the proposed organizational structure?
Specific to the FOA:
Is there strong evidence that the environment has the resources necessary to conduct a remotely delivered intervention with remote recruitment, intervention delivery and data collection in a safe, secure, and timely fashion?
For studies proposing pragmatic trials within health care systems: Does the application provide sufficient rationale for the health care system(s) selected for the project? Is commitment from the HCS to the project evident? Has/have the health care system(s) successfully conducted clinical studies, such that there are sufficient infrastructure and expertise (e.g., clinical investigators, informaticists) to implement the proposed pragmatic trial within all proposed health care systems?
How strongly do the milestones address the specific aims of each phase? Are the listed milestones appropriate for the goals of the project? To what extent are the milestones relevant, measurable, achievable, result-focused, and timebound? Does the application address contingency plans in the event the milestones are not achieved?
Is the proposed Data and Safety Monitoring Plan appropriate for the proposed clinical trial? Are any safety concerns related to the remote-delivery methods adequately addressed? Are there appropriate safeguards in place to minimize risk?
Is the study timeline described in detail, taking into account start-up activities, the anticipated rate of enrollment, and planned follow-up assessment? Is the projected timeline feasible and well justified? Does the project incorporate efficiencies and utilize existing resources (e.g., CTSAs, practice-based research networks, electronic medical records, administrative database, or patient registries) to increase the efficiency of participant enrollment and data collection, as appropriate? Are potential challenges and corresponding solutions discussed (e.g., strategies that can be implemented in the event of enrollment shortfalls)?
For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of thecategories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.
When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults) to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.
The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following 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.
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.
Note: Effective for due dates on or after January 25, 2023, the Data Sharing Plan and Genomic Data Sharing Plan (GDS) as part of the Resource Sharing Plan will not be evaluated at time of review.
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 (GDS).
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 NCCIH, in accordance with NIH peer review policy and procedures, using the stated review criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA Commons.
Information regarding the disposition of applications is available 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.
ClinicalTrials.gov: If an award provides for one or more clinical trials. By law (Title VIII, Section 801 of Public Law 110-85), the "responsible party" must register and submit results information for certain applicable clinical trials on the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System Information Website (https://register.clinicaltrials.gov). NIH expects registration and results reporting of all trials whether required under the law or not. For more information, see https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/reporting/index.htm
Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee Approval: Grantee institutions must ensure that protocols are reviewed by their IRB or IEC. To help ensure the safety of participants enrolled in NIH-funded studies, the awardee must provide NIH copies of documents related to all major changes in the status of ongoing protocols.
Monitoring Requirements: The NIH policy for data and safety monitoring requires oversight and monitoring of all NIH-conducted or -supported human biomedical and behavioral intervention studies (clinical trials) to ensure the safety of participants and the validity and integrity of the data. Further information concerning these requirements is found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/hs/data_safety.htm and in the application instructions (SF424 (R&R) and PHS 398).
Investigational New Drug or Investigational Device Exemption Requirements: Consistent with federal regulations, clinical research projects involving the use of investigational therapeutics, vaccines, or other medical interventions (including licensed products and devices for a purpose other than that for which they were licensed) in humans under a research protocol must be performed under a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigational new drug (IND) or investigational device exemption (IDE).
All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, 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 laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, age and, in some circumstances, religion, conscience, and sex. This includes ensuring programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency. The HHS Office for Civil Rights provides guidance on complying with civil rights laws enforced by HHS. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-providers/provider-obligations/index.html and http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/understanding/section1557/index.html.
HHS recognizes that research projects are often limited in scope for many reasons that are nondiscriminatory, such as the principal investigator’s scientific interest, funding limitations, recruitment requirements, and other considerations. Thus, criteria in research protocols that target or exclude certain populations are warranted where nondiscriminatory justifications establish that such criteria are appropriate with respect to the health or safety of the subjects, the scientific study design, or the purpose of the research. For additional guidance regarding how the provisions apply to NIH grant programs, please contact the Scientific/Research Contact that is identified in Section VII under Agency Contacts of this FOA.
Please contact the HHS Office for Civil Rights for more information about obligations and prohibitions under federal civil rights laws at https://www.hhs.gov/ocr/about-us/contact-us/index.html or call 1-800-368-1019 or TDD 1-800-537-7697.
In accordance with the statutory provisions contained in Section 872 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), NIH awards will be subject to the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) requirements. FAPIIS requires Federal award making officials to review and consider information about an applicant in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS) prior to making an award. An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through FAPIIS and comment on any information about itself that a Federal agency previously entered and is currently in FAPIIS. The Federal awarding agency will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to other information in FAPIIS, in making a judgement about the applicant’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 45 CFR Part 75.205 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants. This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.
Data Management and Sharing
Note: The NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing is effective for due dates on or after January 25, 2023.
Consistent with the NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing, when data management and sharing is applicable to the award, recipients will be required to adhere to the Data Management and Sharing requirements as outlined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. Upon the approval of a Data Management and Sharing Plan, it is required for recipients to implement the plan as described.
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 agreementsare 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.
Finding Help Online:http://grants.nih.gov/support/(preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
General Grants Information (Questions regarding application instructions, application processes, and NIH grant resources)
Email:GrantsInfo@nih.gov(preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-637-3015
Grants.gov Customer Support(Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email:support@grants.gov
Lanay Mudd, Ph.D
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)
Telephone: 301-594-9346
Email: lanay.mudd@nih.gov
Martina Schmidt, Ph.D.
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)
Telephone: 301-594-3456
Email: SchmidMa@mail.nih.gov
Shelley Carow
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH)
Telephone: 301-594-3788
Email: carows@mail.nih.gov