EXPIRED
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
R03 Small Grant Program
The goal of the Grants for Early Medical/Surgical Specialists' Transition to Aging Research (GEMSSTAR) program is to provide support for early-career physician-scientists trained in medical or surgical specialties and early-career dentist-scientists to launch careers as future leaders in aging- or geriatric-focused research. In support of the program's goal, this GEMSSTAR notice of funding opportunity (NOFO) invites applications that propose to conduct transdisciplinary aging research that will yield pilot data and experience for subsequent aging research projects. The GEMSSTAR program encourages candidates to seek out a supportive research environment to further the program's objectives of fostering the development of early-career physician- and dentist-scientists in aging- or geriatric-focused research, particularly as it applies to their clinical specialty/discipline. Toward this end, GEMSSTAR candidates should include a Professional Development Plan that reflects this supportive research environment. In selecting GEMSSTAR awardees, the National Institute on Aging (NIA) will consider the extent to which a candidate's environment is supportive of aging- or geriatric-focused research.
October 01, 2024
Application Due Dates | Review and Award Cycles | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
New | Renewal / Resubmission / Revision (as allowed) | AIDS - New/Renewal/Resubmission/Revision, as allowed | Scientific Merit Review | Advisory Council Review | Earliest Start Date |
November 01, 2024 | November 01, 2024 | Not Applicable | March 2025 | May 2025 | July 2025 |
All applications are due by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization's time zone.
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.
No late applications will be accepted for this Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO).
Not Applicable
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this NOFO or in a Notice from NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts).
Conformance to all requirements (both in the How to Apply - Application Guide and the NOFO) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the How to Apply - Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions.
Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
There are several options available to submit your application through Grants.gov to NIH and Department of Health and Human Services partners. You must use one of these submission options to access the application forms for this opportunity.
With the growing number of older adults with complex health challenges, there is an equally growing need for medical, surgical, and dental clinician-scientists with training and experience in research focused on optimizing the care of older patients. A pivotal point in the development of clinician-scientists is the completion of specialty training and the first faculty appointment. At this early stage, limited research experience and publication record preclude competitiveness for many kinds of advanced research opportunities. This transition stage may be particularly difficult for physicians or dentists focusing on aging-related aspects of their specialty/discipline, as multidisciplinary research entails training that is rarely available in conventional programs. Thus, mechanisms that allow these clinicians to initiate research projects and establish research track records are critical for cultivating the next generation of clinician-scientists at the interface of aging and medical, dental, and surgical specialties.
The goal of the GEMSSTAR program is to provide support for early-career physician-scientists trained in medical or surgical specialties and early-career dentist-scientists for small, transdisciplinary research projects on questions relevant to aging and/or the aged to launch careers as future leaders in aging- or geriatric-focused research. This GEMSSTAR NOFO invites applications proposing to conduct transdisciplinary aging research that will yield pilot data and experience for subsequent aging research projects. The GEMSSTAR program encourages candidates to seek out a supportive research environment that will further the program's objectives of fostering the development of early-career physician- and dentist-scientists in aging- or geriatric-focused research, particularly as it applies to their clinical specialty/discipline. In selecting GEMSSTAR awardees, NIA will consider the extent to which a candidate's environment is supportive of aging- or geriatric-focused research.
The GEMSSTAR program is intended to support an early-career physician's or dentist's first independent research project. The program also provides an opportunity for physicians and dentists who are funded in non-aging-related fields to refocus their research efforts on aging- or geriatrics-related topics. Thus, the program seeks applicants who aspire to continue or shift their research focus to bridge their specialty/discipline and the clinical care of older adults.
The GEMSSTAR program provides two years of funding. Applicants should emphasize integration of gerontologic or geriatric research with the candidates clinical specialty/discipline. Proposed projects may involve pilot or feasibility studies, secondary analyses of existing data, development of research methodology, development of new research technology, or other similar approaches. Projects may span the breadth of scientific domains, including basic, translational, clinical, genetic, or epidemiologic science. Human subjects, animal models, and in vitro systems are all acceptable as appropriate to the research questions. Projects should be appropriate to the background and level of experience of the applicant. Potential research topics may include, but are not limited to, the following:
Please refer to Section III. Eligibility Information, Eligible Individuals (Program Director/Principal Investigator) for clarification on eligibility. It is expected that applicants will have expertise in their clinical specialty/discipline, but may be less experienced in geriatric/gerontologic science or in other areas. As such, applicants should include participation of a senior collaborator with complementary expertise in aging-related research and, if needed, other collaborators and/or consultants in additional areas appropriate to the proposed project.
Geriatricians proposing a research project that integrates their geriatrics expertise with a specific clinical problem that is typically embraced by another specialty should involve a senior collaborator with expertise in that clinical problem as it relates to older patients. For example, a geriatrician researcher proposing a project focused on chronic kidney disease is encouraged to involve a senior nephrologist or other relevant specialist.
In addition to the research project, candidates must also include a Professional Development Plan that describes an individualized plan to garner resources, activities, collaborations, and/or didactic or practical experiences concurrent with the R03 research project that will 1) lead to enhanced knowledge and skills in aging/geriatrics science, and 2) increase the applicant's likelihood of successful completion of their proposed GEMSSTAR project. This plan would complement the GEMSSTAR R03 award and would need to be supported independent of the R03 research plan and funding.
More details about the Professional Development Plan and other details can be found on the NIA GEMSSTAR webpage. Prospective applicants are strongly encouraged to visit this webpage for answers to frequently asked questions and to learn more about the GEMSSTAR program.
NOTE TO APPLICANTS CONSIDERING A CLINICAL TRIAL: The limited time and budget provided by this NOFO will constrain the types of clinical trials that can be proposed. In general, only mechanistic trials or small pilot trials are likely to be feasible. Applicants considering a clinical trial are highly encouraged to contact NIA program staff early to discuss the feasibility of doing so. Refer also to the NIH's policies and requirements for clinical trials. Investigators proposing NIH-defined clinical trials may refer to the Research Methods Resources website for information about developing statistical methods and study designs.
NIA uses a central resource to NIA staff and extramural investigators to facilitate/support the conduct and management of clinical research. NIA Clinical Research Operations & Management System (CROMS) is a comprehensive data management system to support the business functions, management, and oversight responsibilities of NIA grants that support the conduct of clinical research with human subjects. NIA investigators of grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements that are active as of July 1, 2021, including clinical trials funded as pilots, exploratory studies, or other projects through this Consortium, and support human subjects research as defined by the DHS HHS OHRP regulations at 45 CFR 46 will be required to interact with and use existing and future components of CROMS as required by NIA throughout the lifecycle of the grant, as described in NOT-AG-23-017. Data to be submitted to NIA CROMS includes those elements reported in the standard NIH requirement annual progress report (GPS 4.1.15.7). Details regarding the standard operating procedures for CROMS can be found on the NIA CROMS website.
When applicable, all NIA grantees must ensure:
1. The studys Informed Consent Document (ICD) lists The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and its authorized representatives as one of the organizations that may look at or receive copies of information in participants study records. According to DHS HHS OHRP 45 CFR 46 §46.116, all ICDs must contain A statement describing the extent, if any, to which confidentiality of records identifying the participant will be maintained. If using the NIA informed consent template, please see Section 6: Statement of Confidentiality.
2. An assigned NIH ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number) is reported in its respective CROMS study record within three months after assignment, and the reporting of final enrollment data to CROMS is consistent with final enrollment data reported in ClinicalTrials.gov.
NIA is committed to supporting and conducting research on aging that improves the health and well-being of all people. Therefore, NIA will prioritize the advancement of science that represents, in terms of race, ethnicity, sex, age, and comorbidity, the population affected by the condition being studied. Applicants should ensure as applicable that they 1) include proposed planned enrollment tables identifying the population(s) affected by the disease/condition, and 2) address the NIH Inclusion Policies for Research Involving Human Subjects and NIH-designated Populations with Health Disparities, as appropriate; as well as other populations that experience health disparities.
See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.
Grant: A financial assistance mechanism providing money, property, or both to an eligible entity to carry out an approved project or activity.
The OER Glossary and the How to Apply - Application Guide provide details on these application types. Only those application types listed here are allowed for this NOFO.
Optional: Accepting applications that either propose or do not propose clinical trial(s).
Funds Available: $3.8 million in fiscal year 2025
Anticipated Number of Awards: 15 general awards and 4 Alzheimers disease (AD) or AD-related dementias (ADRD) awards.
Application budgets are limited to $125,000 in direct costs per year.
Indirect costs are those for a common or joint purpose across more than one project and that cannot be easily separated by project. Learn more at 45 CFR 75.414, Indirect Costs.
To charge indirect costs applicants can select one of two methods:
Method 1 – Approved rate. The applicant organization currently has an indirect cost rate approved by the applicant organizations cognizant federal agency.
Method 2 – De minimis rate. Per 45 CFR 75.414(f), if the applicant organization has never received a negotiated indirect cost rate or is awaiting approval of an indirect cost proposal, they may elect to charge a de minimis rate. If choosing this method, costs included in the indirect cost pool must not be charged as direct costs.
This rate is 10% of modified total direct costs (MTDC). See 45 CFR 75.2 for the definition of MTDC. Organizations can use this rate indefinitely.
The project period is limited to 2 years.
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made from this NOFO.
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
Local Governments
Federal Governments
Other
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Organizations) 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
The applicant organization must be registered in SAM.gov, Grants.gov, and eRA Commons before submitting an application.
While applicants can review the requirements and start developing applications before registrations are complete, applicants should complete these steps early.
Failure to complete required registrations before the due date is not a valid reason for a late submission. Please reference NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications for more information.
Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))
Every 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.
All other personnel listed on the SF424 (R&R) Senior/Key Person Profile must have an eRA Commons account.
Eligibility is limited to individuals aiming to focus on aging research within their specialty/discipline who are:
This award is not intended for individuals with substantial experience in aging research. It is generally expected that applicants will not have had prior research funding as an independent PD/PI on a major NIH grant (e.g., R01, P01), though they may have had support through institutional awards, such as institutional career development awards (e.g., K12, KL2) or NIA Center research education awards. Note that NIH policy now allows investigators with K awards to receive salary compensation from Federal or non-Federal sources for effort not directly supported by their K award (see NOT-OD-17-094).
Candidates who have received individual mentored K-awards from NIA (excluding K38 and K99) are generally ineligible. Early-career clinician-scientists who have had a previous NIH individual mentored career development award in a non-aging-related field and who wish to refocus their research efforts on aging-related science are eligible to apply for a GEMSSTAR award. However, such individuals must provide strong justification in their application explaining how their proposed research will entail a meaningful shift towards aging-related science within their clinical specialty or discipline. Such applicants are strongly encouraged to discuss their eligibility with NIA program staff early in the application process.
Applicants considering applying for a mentored K award and a GEMSSTAR award concurrently are strongly encouraged to contact NIA program staff to ensure their plans are consistent with NIH policy and NIA programmatic interests. The aims of the two applications must not overlap per NIH submission policies. NIA will weigh an applicant's funding from other NIA and NIH awards in making GEMSSTAR funding decisions.
Eligibility is limited to candidates who have, or will have, a faculty appointment at the start of GEMSSTAR funding. Candidates in the last year of training should provide documentation of institutional commitment for a faculty appointment as described in Letters of Support in Section IV. Faculty appointments that are contingent on receiving a GEMSSTAR award are not acceptable.
It is expected that GEMSSTAR applications will have a single PD/PI and that other personnel will be listed as collaborators or consultants.
Answers to frequently asked questions regarding GEMSSTAR eligibility can be found on NIA's GEMSSTAR webpage.
This NOFO does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 1.2 Definition of Terms.
Number of Applications
Applicant organizations may submit more than one application if each is scientifically distinct. NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time. See the policy on Submission of Resubmission Application.
This means that 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 NOFO. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution.
Applicants must follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide unless this NOFO says otherwise. NIH strictly enforces these requirements. If the applicant does not follow them, NIH may delay or not accept the application for review. NIH encourages organizations to submit applications in advance of deadlines.
NIH asks that applicant organizations let us know if they plan to apply for this opportunity. The purpose is to plan for the number of expert reviewers needed to evaluate applications. It is not required.
By the date listed in Part 1. Overview Information, prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:
Please email the optional letter of intent to:
Ramesh Vemuri, Ph.D.
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
Telephone: 301-496-9666
Email: [email protected]
All page limitations described in the How to Apply – Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
The following section supplements the instructions found in the How to Apply – Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this NOFO.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Other attachments: Applicants must include an attachment titled "Professional Development Plan" that describes an individualized plan to garner resources, activities, collaborations, and/or didactic or practical experiences concurrent with the R03 research project that will 1) lead to enhanced knowledge and skills in aging/geriatrics science, and 2) increase the applicant's likelihood of successful completion of their proposed GEMSSTAR project. This plan would complement the GEMSSTAR R03 award and would need to be supported independent of the R03 research plan and funding.
This section is limited to 5 pages.
The elements of a Professional Development Plan may differ for each applicant based on career stage, research experience, institutional resources, or other factors. Applicants are encouraged to tailor their plans to meet their individual professional development needs in relation to their proposed GEMSSTAR project. Moreover, applicants are encouraged to describe specific activities that will augment their skills in geriatrics and/or aging research in order to develop into independent researchers in aging science.
Additional information on designing a Professional Development Plan, including answers to frequently asked questions, can be found on NIA's GEMSSTAR webpage.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Applicants should use the biographical sketch of the principal investigator to illustrate how this award will advance the investigator's career in aging research. Applicants should use biographical sketches of all investigators to illustrate complementary and integrated expertise in aging and/or geriatrics among the research team, and the appropriateness of each person's role to advance the specific aims of the project.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Applicants should budget for travel to the annual GEMSSTAR grantees meeting supported by the Clin-STAR Coordinating Center. Except in unusual circumstances, only the PD/PI may be supported by R03 funds to travel to the grantees meeting. There is no specific line item in the Modular Budget format in which to list travel costs; instead, the proposed travel should be described in the budget justification section.
Answers to frequently asked questions regarding travel to the grantees meeting can be found on NIA's GEMSSTAR webpage.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Research Strategy: In accordance with the goals of the GEMSSTAR program, the Research Strategy should emphasize how the candidate's proposed research will advance the understanding of aging- or geriatrics-related science in the candidates specialty/discipline, as well as facilitate the candidates transition specifically into aging research. Applicants should address to what extent the proposed project introduces aging-related research questions to the applicants clinical specialty/disciplinary area, as well as its potential contribution to new and meaningful knowledge of geriatric or gerontologic science related to the applicants clinical specialty/discipline.
Clinical Trials: Without duplicating information in the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information Form, applicants proposing a clinical trial, ancillary, or feasibility study should describe the planned analyses and statistical approach and how the expected analytical approach is suited to the available resources, proposed study design, project scope, and methods used to assign trial participants and deliver interventions.
If proposing an ancillary study to an ongoing clinical trial, applicants should provide a brief description of its relationship to the larger clinical trial.
If proposing a feasibility study to begin to address a clinical question, applicants should provide justification as to why this is warranted and how it will contribute to the overall goals of the research project, including planning and preliminary data for future, larger-scale clinical trials.
Applicants should describe the proposed timelines for the proposed clinical trial, feasibility, or ancillary study, including any potential challenges and solutions (e.g., enrollment shortfalls or inability to attribute causal inference to the results of an intervention when performing a small feasibility study).
Letters of Support: Letters of support from department or division chairs, other institutional leaders, senior collaborators, and other contributors should describe, where appropriate, the following:
Letters of support associated with a Professional Development Plan, if included, should be placed in the Letters of Support section. Applicants are encouraged to visit NIA's GEMSSTAR webpage for additional information regarding letters of support.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the How to Apply - Application Guide.
Other Plan(s):
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Appendix: Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the How to Apply - Application Guide.
When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials (and when applicable, clinical trials research experience) follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the How to Apply - Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If the answer to the question Are Human Subjects Involved? on the R&R Other Project Information form is yes, include at least one human subjects study record. Use either of the following parts of the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form:
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Section 2 - Study Population Characteristics
2.2 Eligibility Criteria
Applications in response to this funding opportunity must provide a rationale supporting eligibility criteria that are 1) representative of the population affected by the disease/condition, and 2) address the populations outlined in the NIH Inclusion Policies for Research Involving Human Subjects and NIH-designated Populations with Health Disparities, as appropriate; as well as other populations that experience health disparities. The goal is for clinical trials to address inclusion, so that researchers can determine whether the variables being studied affect women or members of any racial and ethnic population group in accordance with the NIH Inclusion Policies.
Study teams must demonstrate that they have considered the NIH Inclusion Policies including proposed planned enrollment tables representative of the population affected by the disease/condition. Where applicable, study teams should also demonstrate that they have critically evaluated whether eligibility criteria from an earlier phase trial should be carried forward into a later phase trial. The eligibility criteria section should:
2.5 Recruitment and Retention Plan
Applications in response to this funding opportunity should propose innovative and proactive recruitment strategies for involving understudied populations to promote representation as applicable and justified by the scientific goals. Applicants should ensure that they 1) include proposed planned enrollment tables identifying the population(s) affected by the disease/condition, and 2) address the populations outlined in the NIH Inclusion Policies for Research Involving Human Subjects and NIH-designated Populations with Health Disparities, as appropriate; as well as other populations that experience health disparities. Recruitment and retention plans should demonstrate an understanding of the participant burden involved in research participation and strategies for minimizing this burden, as well as leveraging community partners and outreach efforts. The recruitment and retention plan should:
Delayed Onset Study
Note: Delayed onset is not the same as a delayed start study that can be described but will not start immediately.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
See Part 2. 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. contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants should apply early to allow time to make corrections to errors found in the application during the submission process before the due date. When a due 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, NIHs 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 Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications.
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 How to Apply – Application Guide.
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the How to Apply - 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. Follow the overall instructions at How to Submit, Track and View Your Application on our website.
If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that impacts the ability to complete the submission process on-time, 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 have an eRA Commons ID account that is affiliated 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.
All other personnel listed on the SF424 (R&R) Senior/Key Person Profile must have an eRA Commons account.
See Section III of this NOFO for information on registration requirements.
The applicant organization must ensure that the unique entity identifier provided on the application is the same identifier used in the organizations profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Management. Additional information may be found in the How to Apply - 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 NIA, NIH. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant, and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.
Recipients or subrecipients must submit any information related to violations of federal criminal law involving fraud, bribery, or gratuity violations potentially affecting the federal award. See Mandatory Disclosures, 2 CFR 200.113 and NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 4.1.35.
Send written disclosures to the NIH Chief Grants Management Officer listed on the Notice of Award for the IC that funded the award and to the HHS Office of Inspector Grant Self Disclosure Program at [email protected].
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy
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.
For this particular NOFO, note the following:
The R03 small grant supports discrete, well-defined projects that realistically can be completed in two years and that require limited levels of funding. Because the research project usually is limited, an R03 grant application may not contain extensive detail or discussion. Accordingly, reviewers should evaluate the conceptual framework and general approach to the problem. Appropriate justification for the proposed work can be provided through literature citations, data from other sources, or from investigator-generated data. Preliminary data are not required, particularly in applications proposing pilot or feasibility studies.
A proposed Clinical Trial application may include study design, methods, and intervention that are not by themselves innovative but address important questions or unmet needs. Additionally, the results of the clinical trial may indicate that further clinical development of the intervention is unwarranted or lead to new avenues of scientific investigation.
Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is 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?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
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?
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?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
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 NOFO:
To what extent does the Professional Development Plan promote the candidates knowledge and skills in geriatrics- or aging-related research?
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?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
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?
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?
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?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
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?
Specific to this NOFO:
Eligibility Criteria for Research Involving Human Subjects
To what extent do the eligibility criteria promote inclusion of the population affected by the disease/condition? To what extent is justification provided for eligibility criteria, including inclusion and exclusion of NIH-designated Populations with Health Disparities? Have barriers to participation been assessed adequately?
Recruitment and Retention Plan for Research Involving Human Subjects
How well does the recruitment and retention plan demonstrate efforts to engage understudied populations in the clinical trial, as applicable and justified by the scientific goals? To what extent will the recruitment efforts increase community engagement, reduce identified barriers, and sustain the engagement of understudied populations? To what extent are plans described to train staff to be sensitive to NIH-designated Populations with Health Disparities?
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?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
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 this NOFO:
To what extent does the Professional Development Plan reflect a supportive environment that will facilitate promoting the candidates knowledge and skills in geriatrics- or aging-related research?
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give separate scores for these items.
Specific to applications involving clinical trials
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 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 three points: (1) a complete description of all proposed procedures including the species, strains, ages, sex, and total numbers of animals to be used; (2) justifications that the species is appropriate for the proposed research and why the research goals cannot be accomplished using an alternative non-animal model; and (3) interventions including analgesia, anesthesia, sedation, palliative care, and humane endpoints that will be used to limit any unavoidable discomfort, distress, pain and injury in the conduct of scientifically valuable research. Methods of euthanasia and justification for selected methods, if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals, is also required but is found in a separate section of the application. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals Section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animals 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.
Not Applicable.
Not Applicable.
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items, and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.
Reviewers will assess whether the project presents special opportunities for furthering research programs through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental conditions that exist in other countries and either are not readily available in the United States or augment existing U.S. resources.
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 Resource Sharing Plan(s) (e.g., Sharing Model Organisms) or the rationale for not sharing the resources, is reasonable.
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 will receive a written critique.
Applications may undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit (generally the top half of applications under review) will be discussed and assigned an overall impact score.
Appeals of initial peer review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this NOFO.
Applications will be assigned to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this NOFO. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the National Advisory Council on Aging.
The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.5.1. Just-in-Time Procedures. This request is not a Notice of Award nor should it be construed to be an indicator of possible funding.
Before making an award, NIH conducts a pre-award risk assessment. The purpose is to make sure the applicant organization has handled any past federal awards well and demonstrated sound business practices. NIH uses SAM.gov Exclusions and Responsibility / Qualification to check this history for all awards likely to be over $250K.This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.
The applicant organization can comment on the information in SAM.gov. NIH will consider the comments before making a decision about level of risk.
If there is a significant risk, NIH may choose not to fund the application or to place specific conditions on the award.
For more details, see 2 CFR Part 200.206.
After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access their Summary Statement (written critique) via the eRA Commons. Refer to Part 1 for dates for peer review, advisory council review, and earliest start date.
Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.4.4 Disposition of Applications.
If an application is successful, NIH will email a Notice of Award (NoA) to the authorized official. NIH will inform the applicant organization if their application is disqualified or unsuccessful.
The NoA is the only official award document. The NoA explains the amount of the award, important dates, and the terms and conditions recipients need to follow. Until the organization receives the NoA, the recipient does not have permission to begin the research project.
All awards are subject to terms and conditions at Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website.
Recipients must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.6. Funding Restrictions. Any pre-award costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the applicant's own risk. For more information on the Notice of Award, please refer to the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 5. The Notice of Award and NIH Grants & Funding website, see Award Process.
Individual awards are based on the application submitted to, and as approved by, the NIH and are subject to the IC-specific terms and conditions identified in the NoA.
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: Recipient institutions must ensure that all protocols are reviewed by their IRB or IEC. To help ensure the safety of participants enrolled in NIH-funded studies, the recipient must provide NIH copies of documents related to all major changes in the status of ongoing protocols.
Data and Safety 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 terms and conditions in the Notice of Award (NoA) The NoA includes the requirements of this NOFO. For these terms, note the following:
All federal statutes and regulations relevant to federal financial assistance, including those highlighted in NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 4 Public Policy Requirements, Objectives and Other Appropriation Mandates.
Recipients are responsible for ensuring that their activities comply with all applicable federal regulations. NIH may terminate awards under certain circumstances. See 2 CFR Part 200.340 Termination and NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 8.5.2 Remedies for Noncompliance or Enforcement Actions: Suspension, Termination, and Withholding of Support.
Not Applicable
Consistent with the 2023 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.
When multiple years are involved, recipients will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 8.4.1 Reporting. To learn more about post-award monitoring and reporting, see the NIH Grants & Funding website, see Post-Award Monitoring and Reporting.
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 Section 8.6 Closeout. NIH NOFOs outline intended research goals and objectives. Post award, NIH will review and measure performance based on the details and outcomes that are shared within the RPPR, as described at 2 CFR Part 200.301.
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
eRA Service Desk
Contact the eRA Service Desk for questions about ASSIST, eRA Commons, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, and post-submission issues.
Finding Help Online: https://www.era.nih.gov/need-help (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
General Grants Information
Contact Grants Information for questions about application instructions, application processes, and NIH grant resources.
Email: [email protected] (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-480-7075
Grants.gov Customer Support
Contact Grants.gov Customer Support for questions about Grants.gov registration and Workspace.
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: [email protected]
NIA GEMSSTAR
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
Email: [email protected]
Ramesh Vemuri, Ph.D.
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
Telephone: 301-496-9666
Email: [email protected]
Laura Pone
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
Telephone: 301-451-9956
Email: [email protected]
Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
NIH makes awards under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 2 CFR Part 200.