National Institute on Aging (NIA)
This funding opportunity will support a new, centralized infrastructure (U24) to aggregate, harmonize, manage, and share existing and future neuroimaging data collected in NIA-supported Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers (ADRCs). An additional activity will be to define appropriate imaging protocols, as well as assess and anticipate advances in neuroimaging technologies and techniques for inclusion in the standardized protocols to maximize utility for the field of Alzheimer's disease and Alzheimer's disease related dementias (AD/ADRD) research.
May 22, 2019
June 22, 2019
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.
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide,except where instructed to do otherwise (in this FOA or in a Notice from NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts ).
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.
One of the most important scientific advances of the past decade has been development of methods to diagnose Alzheimer’s disease (AD) in living humans. High-resolution brain MRI, combined with new methods for detecting ante mortem neuropathology (CSF measures of beta-amyloid, tau, and pTau, or PET radioligands to visualize brain beta-amyloid plaques or pTau tangles in vivo) have transformed clinical AD research. Biomarker characterization of brain beta-amyloid, tau, and neurodegeneration.
The Alzheimer’s Disease Research Centers (ADRCs), supported by NIA, form the backbone of clinical AD and related dementia research in the United States. Considerable efforts have been made over the years to harmonize clinical and neuropathological methods across Centers, and the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center (NACC) stores and shares common ADRC clinical and neuropathologic data. Recently, a number of ADRCs have voluntarily added MRI and PET neuroimaging scans and data to the NACC, but the protocols have not been harmonized, nor have the images been quality controlled or curated. A set of proposed imaging standards is available through the NACC website. Applicants are strongly advised to review this document.
In 2004, NIA initiated the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI), a public-private partnership to develop biomarkers to facilitate AD treatment trials. Over the past 15 years, ADNI has developed methods for harmonizing and combining longitudinal MRI and PET neuroimaging data from healthy controls, individuals with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI), and people with AD, studied at different clinical sites, using different MRI and PET instruments but common acquisition protocols. The ADNI neuroimaging database has become a major resource for academic and industry investigators studying clinical AD.
Almost all of the institutions with ADRCs also participate in ADNI. However, while there is usually collaboration and personnel overlap between the ADRC and ADNI site at any institution, the two are administratively distinct and function independently. ADRC neuroimaging data collection is informed by ADNI, but methods are not necessarily identical. Moreover, much of the neuroimaging data collected at ADRCs is not collected by the Center, but by investigator-initiated research projects, which may or may not include Center participants and is separate from ADNI. ADNI’s experience and methods provide a roadmap for standardizing and harmonizing neuroimaging data across ADRCs.
Different ADRCs focus on different aspects of dementia, and the participants and associated phenotypes in the ADRCs are more varied than those in ADNI or any other existing cohort. Given the range of phenotypes and the standardized clinical and neuropathological data, more systematic sharing of harmonized ADRC neuroimaging data would have great scientific value.
Broader dissemination and standardization of neuroimaging and other biomarker tools for diagnosing AD/ADRD are a priority for NIA. ADNI provides a model and the ADRCs provide an opportunity for adding neuroimaging data of deeply phenotyped participants with longitudinal follow up. The dissemination and utilization of such clinically valuable data paired with neuroimaging can advance the field.
Three major tasks need to be accomplished in order to share standardized imaging data on ADRC participants:
1. Standardize collection of select MRI and PET neuroimaging scans at the ADRCs, and plan for incorporating development of new MRI and PET neuroimaging methods.
2. Transfer and harmonize standardized MRI and PET scans to a central repository.
3. Manage neuroimaging data in the repository and share de-identified ADRC PET and MRI scans with investigators.
This effort focuses on the second task and will provide guidelines and leadership to develop technical assistance to existing ADRCs to carry out the first task (e.g., selecting which MRI modalities & PET tracers to standardize) and NACC to carry out the third task. This effort will not involve direct acquisition of neuroimaging data from human research participants, which will take place at ADRCs; nor will it involve provision of storage and back-up of digital information, which will be through the repository.
Applicants are strongly encouraged to take advantage of and build upon work already done by ADNI. NIA's expectation is that the final, individual MRI and PET scans produced by SCAN and available from the repository will be harmonized and combinable across ADRCs and with individual MRI and PET scans available from ADNI.
Applicants are strongly encouraged to consult with NIA scientific/research staff early in the pre-submission process to ensure that the application is responsive to the programmatic goals of this FOA.
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.
NIH intends to commit $1.5 million in FY 2020 to fund one award. Future year amounts will depend on annual appropriations.
The project period is five 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
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.
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.
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:
Nina Silverberg, Ph.D.
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
Facilities & Other Resources:
Describe the resources that support the proposed activities.
Describe the activities that will facilitate communication between SCAN and the ADRCs.
Describe the logistical and administrative assistance as well as operational support, including, but not limited to, website maintenance, meeting support, maintenance of documents, and coordination of site visits for audits. Detail outreach to and provisions for adding ADRCs that are not initially participating in the effort.
Describe how the proposed resources can accommodate the growth of neuroimaging in the ADRCs.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Applications should budget for a minimum data flow per year, as costs can depend in part on the number of individual MRI and PET scans processed. The unit cost per MRI and per PET scan should be specified.
Specific Aims: Clearly state how the application will work to facilitate standardized and harmonized neuroimaging data at the ADRCs and assure secure transmission of quality-controlled and curated images to the repository.
Research Strategy: Organize the Research Strategy into sections on Significance, Innovation, and Approach.
Significance: Describe the importance of the neuroimaging standardization project and how the proposed resources and activities will lead to advances in the field.
Innovation: Indicate how the planned resource will contribute to innovation and advancement of the AD/ADRD field. Describe how the combined data will create opportunities for innovative research and improved approaches. Detail the process for incorporation and dissemination of new or improved neuroimaging methodologies to the ADRCs.
Define the balance between harmonization and innovation. Describe considerations for flexibility to accomodate upgraded technologies, improved methodologies, and new discoveries in the AD/ADRD neuroimaging field.
Approach: Discuss plans for activities, including, but not limited to, the following:
Delineate annual milestones and deliverables for all aspects of the research plan.
Letters of Support: Include letters from ADRCs that plan to participate in this resource. Letters should include estimated numbers of MRI and PET scans that will be provided, including participant demographics and clinical diagnosis, and indicate a commitment to the SCAN standards and protocols.
The following modifications also apply:
In order to maximize the availability and usability of the data and research resources generated by NIA’s ADRC program, and to comply with NIA/NIH efforts aimed at increasing transparency, reproducibility, and translatability of research findings, the awardees are expected to engage in broad sharing of data and analytical methodology prior to publication, consistent with achieving the goals of the program.
To this end, awardees should demonstrate efforts to make all data sets and protocols used/generated by this project accessible and reusable by qualified individuals, in addition to the original data generators, via web-based resources.
Data can be made accessible via open or controlled access, depending on the data type and data source and as determined by the informed consent documents for each study guided by the local IRB. A comprehensive listing of NIH data sharing repositories is available at https://www.nlm.nih.gov/NIHbmic/nih_data_sharing_repositories.html.
The Steering Committee of the NACC, in conjunction with the ADRC Directors and NIA, sets policies that allow the individual Centers to conduct unique research with participants while also sharing common data sets with NACC.
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 with the following additional instructions:
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.
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.
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.
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 and responsiveness by components of participating organizations, NIH. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.
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?
How well does the applicant describe the importance of the standardization effort? How will the resources of the team lead to advances in the 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 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?
How will the proposed effort balance needed standardization with important advances in the field? Will the proposed strategies lead to new opportunities in the field developed from the much larger harmonized data set available?
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?
How likely is it that the described activities will lead to a successful, standardized, centralized imaging resource? How strong is the plan for bidirectional communication? Is there a plan for regular assessment of the partnering institutions' equipment and protocols? What strengths do they bring to data upload, data annotation, and the image deidentification process? What methods are being used to broadly disseminate protocols and methods? What steps are described to maximize overall image acquisition quality and protocol adherence? How strong are the imaging transfer methods? How good are the plans to quality control and the methods to correct performance issues by participating ADRCs? Is there a system to combine the harmonized neuroimaging data with the clinical, neuropathological, and fluid biomarker data, as well as other existing data sets? How appropriate are the milestones and deliverables?
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?
How strong is the commitment from the participating ADRCs, as indicated by letters of support? Does their scientific environment enhance the probability of success for the resource?
For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.
When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults) to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.
The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following 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.
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 NIA, 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.
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 https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/special-topics/limited-english-proficiency/index.html. The HHS Office for Civil Rights also provides guidance on complying with civil rights laws enforced by HHS. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/section-1557/index.htmlhttps://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-providers/laws-regulations-guidance/index.html. Recipients of FFA also have specific legal obligations for serving qualified individuals with disabilities. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/disability/index.html. 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. 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.
The following special terms of award are in addition to, and not in lieu of, otherwise applicable U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) administrative guidelines; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) grant administration regulations at 45 CFR Part 75; and other HHS, PHS, and NIH grant administration policies.
The administrative and funding instrument used for this program will be the cooperative agreement, an "assistance" mechanism (rather than an "acquisition" mechanism), in which substantial NIH programmatic involvement with the awardees is anticipated during the performance of the activities. Under the cooperative agreement, the NIH purpose is to support and stimulate the recipients' activities by involvement in and otherwise working jointly with the award recipients in a partnership role; it is not to assume direction, prime responsibility, or a dominant role in the activities. Consistent with this concept, the dominant role and prime responsibility resides with the awardees for the project as a whole, although specific tasks and activities may be shared among the awardees and the NIH as defined below.
The PD(s)/PI(s) will have the primary responsibility for:
NIH staff have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below:
Areas of Joint Responsibility include:
Any disagreements that may arise in scientific or programmatic matters (within the scope of the award) between award recipients and the NIH may be brought to Dispute Resolution. A Dispute Resolution Panel composed of three members will be convened. It will have three members: a designee of the Steering Committee chosen without NIH staff voting, one NIH designee, and a third designee with expertise in the relevant area who is chosen by the other two; in the case of individual disagreement, the first member may be chosen by the individual awardee. This special dispute resolution procedure does not alter the awardee's right to appeal an adverse action that is otherwise appealable in accordance with PHS regulation 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D and DHHS regulation 45 CFR Part 16.
A final RPPR, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
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.
eRA Service Desk (Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, and post-submission issues)
Finding Help Online: 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)
Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
John Hsiao, M.D.
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
Ramesh Vemuri, Ph.D.
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.