EXPIRED
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD)
All applications to this funding opportunity announcement should fall within the mission of the Institutes/Centers. The following NIH Offices may co-fund applications assigned to those Institutes/Centers.
Division of Program Coordination, Planning and Strategic Initiatives, Office of Disease Prevention (ODP)
Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research (OBSSR)
New
March 10, 2020 - Reminder: FORMS-F Grant Application Forms & Instructions Must be Used for Due Dates On or After May 25, 2020- New Grant Application Instructions Now Available. See Notice NOT-OD-20-077.
July 26, 2019- Changes to NIH Requirements Regarding Proposed Human Fetal Tissue Research. See Notice NOT-OD-19-128August 23, 2019- Clarifying Competing Application Instructions and Notice of Publication of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Regarding Proposed Human Fetal Tissue Research. See Notice NOT-OD-19-137
None
93.866, 93.865, 93.275, 93.307
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) invites applications for the next 5-year cycle of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health) to include a sixth wave of data collection (Wave VI). Add Health is a nationally representative, longitudinal study of individuals primarily born from 1976 through 1982 who were first interviewed as adolescents in grades 7-12 (ages 12-19) in 1994-1995. Add Health respondents are now entering middle age. The goals for Add Health Wave VI are to:
February 26, 2020
April 18, 2020
May 18, 2020. No late applications will be accepted for this Funding Opportunity Announcement.
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.
Not Applicable
October/November 2020
January 2021
April 2021
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.
Purpose
This FOA invites applications for the next 5-year cycle of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health) to include a sixth wave of data collection (Wave VI). Add Health respondents are now entering middle age. The goals for Add Health Wave VI are to:
Background
The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health) is a nationally representative, longitudinal study of individuals primarily born from 1976 through 1982 who were first interviewed as adolescents in grades 7-12 (ages 12-19) in 1994-1995. To date, four waves of data have been collected at ages 13-20 (1996, Wave II), 18-26 (2001-2002, Wave III), 24-32 (2008, Wave IV), and 32 to 42 (2016-2018, Wave V). Add Health is based on a sample of high schools and middle schools in the United States; the complex survey design yields a sample representative of United States schools according to region, urbanicity, school size, school type, and ethnicity. Add Health includes oversamples of racial and ethnic minority groups, as well as large numbers of individuals differing by immigrant generation status (generation 1, 2, 3+) and family structure (2-parent family, presence of step parents, single-parent family). Add Health includes information on a variety of subjects, including family background, educational experiences, social relationships, personality and psychological characteristics, stressors, employment, children and parenting, and cognitive function. In addition, linkages with contextual and administrative data exist, including school and neighborhood characteristics, high school transcripts, and pollutant data. Add Health has included measures of health and health behaviors from its inception, with the most recent wave (Wave V) collecting genetic (buccal cell and whole blood DNA, mRNA) and biometric measures that capture metabolic, immune, cardiovascular, and renal function as well as inflammation. The Add Health has over 50,000 registered users. A bibliography of over 7,500 publications that cite Add Health data is available at https://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth/publications.
Add Health respondents are presently entering middle age, a time that may be critical for the emergence and progression of many health conditions and disparities as individuals grow older. The Add Health cohort is not only more diverse in terms of race, ethnicity, generation status, and origin family structure than earlier cohorts, they also exhibit worse health profiles than earlier cohorts at the same ages. The purpose of this FOA is to continue and enhance the Add Health study in order to explore the aging experiences of these post-Baby Boom Americans.
Research Objectives
The objectives for the next 5-year cycle of the Add Health are listed below. Applicants are not expected to address all research objectives evenly. Applicants are encouraged to balance among the objectives and justify their priorities and focus.
Applicants are encouraged to balance among longitudinal continuity of design and methods, the aging of the sample, scientific innovation, and budget and other constraints. NIA has not budgeted in this FOA for secondary data analysis or for biomarker assays beyond those conducted in the prior wave (Wave V) of Add Health. NIH has a separate funding allocation for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias research. All data collection efforts (e.g., measures, assays, etc.) focused on assessing cognitive decline and/or future risk of Alzheimer’s disease should be submitted under a separate application to be considered for Alzheimer’s disease-relevant funding. Applicants must submit a Letter of Support demonstrating that they have access to personally identifiable information (PII) about Add Health panel members, from the study's inception, for the purpose of re-contacting respondents for longitudinal follow up. Applicants must also include a plan for protecting PII.
See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.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 following NIH components intend to commit $6 million in FY 2021, all contributing to one award, broken out as follows:
National Institute on Aging (NIA): $4 million
National Institute on Minority and Health Disparities (NIMHD): $500,000
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA): $150,000
Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research (OBSSR): $250,000
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Health and Human Development (NICHD): $1 million
NIH Office of Disease Prevention (ODP): $100,000
NIA has also approved submission of an Alzheimer’s Disease and related dementias (AD/ADRD)-focused application with total costs less than $2,000,000 in FY 2021 to support the integration of AD/ADRD elements into Add Health Wave 6.
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.
Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct.
The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time. This means that the NIH will not accept:
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:
Amelia Karraker, Ph.D.
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
Telephone: 301-496-3136
Email: [email protected]
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Research Strategy
Letters of Support
Applicants must submit a Letter of Support demonstrating that they have access to personally identifiable information (PII) about Add Health panel members, from the study's inception, for the purpose of re-contacting respondents for longitudinal follow up.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.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.
Delayed Onset StudyNote: 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.
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 and responsiveness by components of participating organizations, NIH. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant and/or non-responsive will not be reviewed.
In order to expedite review, applicants are requested to notify the NIA Referral Office by email at[email protected] when the application has been submitted. Please include the FOA number and title, PD/PI name, and title of the application.
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?
If the aims are successfully completed, will the project contribute to improving the understanding of mid- and later-life health and disparities therein?
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?
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?
Is the stated approach able to accomplish all five of the stated goals for the FOA, especially non-response follow up, oversampling of racial/ethnic-minority and low-socioeconomic-status individuals, and enriching measures in domains to elucidate mid- and later-life health and disparities therein?
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?
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.
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
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 and (2)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.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications: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.
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.
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.htmlor 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:
The PD(s)/PI(s) will have primary responsibility for the design and details of the study funded under this FOA and will retain primary responsibility for achieving all study goals. This includes analyzing and publishing results, negotiating linkage to administrative data, negotiating Restricted Use Agreements with relevant entities, and adhering to the Resource Sharing Plan. The PD(s)/PI(s) agree to work closely with the designated NIA Program Official and NIH Project Scientist(s) to ensure progress toward achieving study goals and to coordinate with other Federal agencies.
After award, the PD(s)/PI(s) will appoint a Steering Committee that will be composed of the PD(s)/PI(s), the NIH Project Scientist(s), and experts in the scientific community who are not connected with the study except in this capacity. Additional members may be added at the discretion of the Steering Committee. The role of the Committee is to advise the PD(s)/PI(s) on the overall scientific and financial management of the study and on the recruitment of new study investigators.
The Steering Committee will also appoint a Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) whose purpose is to provide expert independent advice to the PD(s)/PI(s) on the successful implementation of the study. The DMC should be comprised of independent scientific experts in areas appropriate to the multidisciplinary content areas of the Add Health. The NIA Program Official and representatives from other participating federal agencies will be ex-officio members of the DMC. Experts, including but not limited to the PD(s)/PI(s), co-Investigators, the NIA Program Official, the NIH Project Scientist(s), other NIH staff, representatives from other federal agencies, and invited independent experts, will make presentations to the DMC on scientific and administrative issues regarding the development and implementation of study aims. The PD(s)/PI(s) will consider the advice of the DMC regarding implementation of study aims, as well as additions or changes to content and methods during the execution of the cooperative agreement(s). DMC advice is not binding on the PD(s)/PI(s), who retains primary responsibility for scientific direction and implementation.
Awardee(s) will retain custody of and have primary rights to the data and software developed under these awards, subject to Government rights of access consistent with current DHHS, PHS, and NIH policies.
NIH staff have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below:
The NIH Project Scientist(s) will serve as a member of the Steering Committee and will assist in the following areas: refining study objectives, methodologies, and survey instruments; developing record linkages with administrative files maintained by other federal agencies; advancing data dissemination goals; coordinating the study with other relevant surveys of the older population in order to enhance the capacity for comparative analyses; and/or analyzing and publishing the results of the study.
The NIA Program Official will be responsible for the normal scientific and programmatic stewardship of the award and will be named in the award notice. The Program Official will approve all major stages of the study/studies and all new major additions/changes to content and methods. In addition, this individual will assist in initiating and maintaining collaborative relationships with relevant federal agencies. Prior approval is required by the NIA Program Official for any replacements of key personnel or other changes in subcontracts.
Areas of Joint Responsibility include:
A plan for the structure of the Steering Committee will be determined by the PD(s)/PI(s) and will be approved by the NIA Program Official at the time of the award. A plan for the structure of the Data Monitoring Committee will be determined by the Steering Committee and will be approved by the NIH Program Official within six months of the award.
Dispute Resolution:
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.
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:[email protected](preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-945-7573
Grants.gov Customer Support(Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email:[email protected]
Amelia Karraker, Ph.D.
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
Telephone: 301-496-3136
Email: [email protected]
Rebecca Clark, Ph.D.
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
Telephone: 301-496-1175
Email:[email protected]
Kathleen Etz, Ph.D.
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Telephone: 301-402-1749
Email:[email protected]
Nancy Jones, Ph.D.
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD)
Telephone: 301-594-8945
Email:[email protected]
Elizabeth Neilson, Ph.D.
Office of Disease Prevention (ODP)
Telephone: 301-827-5578
Email: [email protected]
Ramesh Vemuri, Ph.D.
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
Telephone: 301-402-7700
Email: [email protected]
Mitchell Whitfield
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
Telephone: 301-827-6373
Email: [email protected]
Bryan Clark
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
Telephone: 301-435-6975
Email: [email protected]
Pamela Fleming
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Telephone: 301-480-1159
Email: [email protected]
Priscilla Grant
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD)
Telephone: 301-594-8412
Email: [email protected]