Full Text CA-95-001 NATIONAL BLACK LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE ON CANCER NIH GUIDE, Volume 24, Number 4, February 3, 1995 RFA: CA-95-001 P.T. 34, FC Keywords: Cancer/Carcinogenesis Disease Prevention+ Disease Control+ National Cancer Institute Letter of Intent Receipt Date: March 3, 1995 Application Receipt Date: April 27, 1995 PURPOSE The National Cancer Institute (NCI), through the Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Cancer Control Science Program, Special Populations Studies Branch, invites applications for a cooperative agreement award to continue building a vigorous cancer prevention and control outreach program for Black American communities. The program, entitled National Black Leadership Initiative on Cancer (NBLIC), has the immediate goals of involving community leaders in building new and maintaining previously established community cancer control coalitions, and addressing the barriers that limit Black Americans' access to quality cancer prevention, control, and treatment services. It is anticipated that such activities will lead to accomplishment of NBLIC's long-range goal of reducing cancer incidence and mortality rates, and increasing survival rates among Black Americans. Intermediate goals include improvements in knowledge and behavior of Black Americans about the prevention and early detection of cancer. HEALTHY PEOPLE 2000 The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving the health promotion and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2000," a PHS-led national activity for setting priority areas. This RFA, National Black Leadership Initiative on Cancer, is related to the priority area of cancer. Potential applicants may obtain a copy of "Healthy People 2000" (Full Report: Stock No. 017-001-00474-0 or Summary Report: Stock No. 017-001-00473-1) through the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 (telephone 202/783-3238). ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS Applications may be submitted by cancer centers, hospitals and clinics, institutions of higher education (public or private) such as colleges, universities, schools of public health, nursing, health science centers, and eligible agencies of the Federal Government. Applicant institutions should have substantial involvement with the black community, providing a range of health care, health education, and/or disease prevention services. Collaborative applications are encouraged. Among collaborators, one must be designated as the lead applicant and assume responsibility for conduct of the project. Foreign organizations are not eligible to apply, and applications from domestic organizations may not include international components. MECHANISM OF SUPPORT Administrative and funding support will be provided via the cooperative agreement (U01), an assistance mechanism in which substantial NCI scientific/programmatic involvement with the awardee is anticipated. Under the cooperative agreement, NCI's purpose is to support community-based activity by jointly cooperating with the award recipient in a partner role, but not to assume direction, prime responsibility, or a dominant role in the project. Details of responsibilities, relationships, and governance of the project that results from this RFA are discussed below under the section "Terms and Conditions of Award." The total project period for applications submitted in response to this RFA may not exceed four years. The anticipated start date for the award is September 1995. At this time, NCI has not determined whether, nor how, this solicitation will be continued beyond the present RFA. FUNDS AVAILABLE Approximately $1.5 million in total costs (direct and indirect) will be committed each year for four years specifically to fund the one award that results from this RFA. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES Background In 1986, the National Cancer Advisory Board (NCAB) expressed concern about the heavy burden of cancer on the Black American community and how the tobacco and alcohol advertisements targeting that community serve to exacerbate the burden. To address their concern, the NCAB formed an ad hoc national planning committee comprised of Black American business, education, and health professionals to develop an operational plan for increasing community awareness about cancer. The work of that committee led to the formation of a conceptual organizational framework which was later named the National Black Leadership Initiative on Cancer and implemented in 1989. Since its inception, NBLIC has facilitated a wide variety of activities to promote cancer control and prevention among Black Americans. The program has developed strong networking relationships with national, state, local, grassroots, and special interest organizations across the United States. A major focus for NBLIC is the establishment of community-based cancer prevention and control coalitions. Project Rationale Data continue to show that Black Americans bear a disproportionate burden of cancer, marked by increasing mortality rates for many cancers in contrast to the trends among whites. The extent to which blacks experience higher cancer mortality is striking. Not only do blacks have higher mortality rates than whites, but these rates are also increasing faster. Further, mortality rates which are decreasing for whites are not decreasing as quickly for blacks and, for a few cancers, are still increasing, i.e., larynx, oral cavity, pancreas, colon and rectum, and leukemia. The age-adjusted incidence rate for all cancers and both sexes combined increased in both blacks and whites by about 22 percent between 1973 and 1991. However, the magnitude of the overall cancer incidence rate among blacks was nearly 8 percent higher than among whites in 1991. In 1991, the age adjusted incidence rate for all cancers combined was 405 per 100,000. Rates are highest in black men (598 per 100,000 and lowest in black women (334 per 100,000). In 1991, the age adjusted mortality rate for all cancers was 173 per 100,000. Mortality rates are highest in black men (317 per 100,000). Rates are lowest in white women (141 per 100,000). Five-year relative survival is higher among women than men and whites than blacks for all sites combined and all sites except lung and bronchus. Exclusion of lung and bronchus results in an almost 10 percentage point increase in survival for white and black men, and a 4 to 5 percentage point increase for white and black women, clearly illustrating the large impact of lung and bronchus on the cancer burden within the general population, especially among men. Improvements in survival since 1974-76 have been significant for all groups except black women although the amount of improvement is small. Black Americans have disproportionately larger numbers of blue-collar workers, possibly increasing their risk of certain occupationally-related cancers. Fewer Black Americans have adequate health insurance coverage, thereby decreasing the likelihood that they will have access to early detection methods or state-of-the-art treatment. Certain culturally-based factors, such as unhealthy dietary habits and negative attitudes toward health and health care, have been identified and linked to cancer within the Black American community. Ethnic and cultural differences involving dietary patterns, alcohol use, and sexual and reproductive behaviors can provide clues to factors involved in the development of cancer. Socioeconomic factors such as lack of health insurance or transportation can impede access to care, and lead to late diagnosis and poor survival. Objectives and Scope Recognizing that there are numerous health interventions being conducted in the black community by local and other federal funding agencies, this RFA will support activities that identify and fill gaps in current cancer prevention and control programs, and evaluate the efficacy of existing intervention strategies. Guided by the results of those activities, the award recipient develops and implements improved intervention strategies, more effective community program, and stronger cancer control coalitions. Measurable improvements are expected in knowledge, attitude, and behavior of Black Americans about the prevention and early detection of cancer. NBLIC is national in scope targeting Black American males and females of all ages. Applicants are strongly encouraged to propose a plan for restructuring NBLIC geographically given the wide distribution of Black Americans in the western and plains states and the dense populations of those in the southern states. The plan should include a description of an efficient organizational structure through which the project will be managed, and programmatic approaches developed for reaching Black Americans in urban, suburban, and rural settings. It is suggested that concepts such as community organizing, and community wellness be considered, among others, as possible models for expanding and enhancing NBLIC coalitions established during previous years and to build new ones. (See references) The NBLIC project will involve three overlapping phases. Planning and Development (Phase I); Program Implementation and Evaluation (Phase II); and, Data Analysis and Reporting (Phase III). Although technical assistance will be provided by NCI (see Terms of Cooperation, below), the awardee is responsible for carrying out all aspects of each phase. The specific elements of each phase may vary relative to the awardee's level of involvement with NBLIC. For example, during Phase I, a continuing awardee might be primarily concerned with project refinement and enhancement in lieu of the developmental measures that would dominate this phase for a new awardee. Nonetheless, the following will be generally applicable: A. Phase I: Planning and Development o Develop a comprehensive, strategic project plan with time schedules and milestones to address all key aspects of the project. The plan should address such things as: the identity of target communities, methods to identify and recruit organizations and local leaders, strategies to establish and maintain productive relationships with cancer-related groups, methods for communities to identify their cancer control needs and design activities to meet these needs, ways to ensure area-wide program support and visibility, strategies for disseminating project findings, plans to provide on and off-site technical assistance, and methods for quality assurance. o Develop and implement a program management plan that includes a description of the program structure, roles and responsibilities of key staff, and a communication system for the regular exchange of information and ideas between key staff members and local area leaders, organizations, and coalitions. o Develop a plan for the development and dissemination of program messages, materials, and products. This will include target groups, goals and objectives, methods of development, distribution, and evaluation. For example, public media campaigns and patient education materials may be planned in response to community-identified needs. o Develop a detailed evaluation plan that includes process, outcome, and cost-effectiveness measures. See "Phase II: Implementation and Evaluation" below. o Develop a long range plan for continued community activity and institutionalization of this outreach initiative after the expiration of the four-year cooperative agreement. The plan may include such things as obtaining in-kind contributions, fostering volunteerism, pursuing cost-containment techniques, and establishing affiliations with health care provider groups and non-profit organizations. B. Phase II: Implementation and Evaluation During the second phase of the project, beginning 2-12 months from award, implementation and evaluation of outreach activities will begin according to the program plans developed in Phase I. Progress towards planning, implementation, evaluation, and documentation will be measured by milestones. Coalitions and outreach activities will be monitored for quality and outcome effects. The development of consortia or coalitions to achieve the objectives of this RFA is encouraged. If a consortium or coalition is proposed, a clear delineation of roles and administrative procedures must be outlined in the application. If the budget request includes support for more than one unit, policies and procedures for financial and program management must be outlined in the application. A significant aim of NCI is to improve the overall national cancer prevention and control effort by creating cohesion among cancer programs it sponsors, and other public and private health organizations. To this end, applicants should strive to establish relationships with relevant cancer programs (e.g., cancer information programs, facilities providing cancer care, local components of national cancer-related organizations, and cancer or other incidence registries) in areas where they exist. 1. Project Evaluation The NCI will only support projects which have well-developed, comprehensive evaluation plans. The evaluation plan must be conceptually and procedurally integrated with the overall project. It must connect implementation and outcome and specify a time frame for conducting all evaluation activities. The evaluation plan must describe the selection and development of sound measures and instruments for data collection. The application must include detailed and clearly written descriptions of process and outcome evaluation. Examples of questions that the NBLIC evaluation design should reflect include the following: o Did NBLIC build and maintain effective coalitions? o What explains coalition effectiveness? o Did NBLIC achieve changes likely to lead to reduced cancer incidence and mortality? o What explains changes in NCI cancer prevention and control indicators? o What about NBLIC is replicable? It is anticipated that the awardee will formulate additional evaluative type questions and/or amend the above to better explain key facets of NBLIC project activity. 2. Process Evaluation Process evaluation facilitates the replication of effective projects. It consists of the periodic monitoring of project implementation to document what actually was being done and to facilitate project adjustments or corrections when needed over the course of the project. It involves the collection of both quantitative and qualitative data that permit a description of the formation and ongoing functions of community coalitions as well as the project as a whole. Process evaluation may include descriptions of the methods used to form structure, and maintain community coalitions; the breadth of coalition membership and the interaction patterns of organizations and individuals in coalitions (e.g., patterns of communication, conflict, conflict resolution, coordination, cooperation, and collaboration); methods used to inform and involve the community in cancer control outreach activities; ways used to sustain trust and credibility for the program, and program costs. Process evaluation may also include detailed descriptions of project activities and their tracking. 3. Outcome Evaluation Outcome evaluation consists of assessing whether the project was effective in meeting its objectives in ways that will lead to project goals. The design of the outcome evaluation and the resulting data should be based on clear and measurable indicators of progress toward project goals. The outcome evaluation design should be rigorous enough to result in valid conclusions concerning the effectiveness and replicability of the project. Baseline data pertaining to the target area are essential for a meaningful outcome evaluation. Proposed baseline data (e.g., cancer measures of the availability and utilization of cancer control services, cancer rates, tobacco use rates, and indicators of knowledge about the prevention and early detection of cancer) and methods for obtaining data must be provided. Additionally, plans for the periodic collection of the same information must be described. The importance of external resources and the likelihood of their availability should be estimated. While awardee researchers should obtain as much baseline data as possible in the process of the preparation of the cooperative agreement application, refinement and development of key elements can occur at the beginning of the project period. The PI funded under this cooperative agreement is responsible for collecting core data that are comparable across project sites. The definition of these data will be jointly decided by the Steering Committee during the first year of the project (see SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS, Terms of Cooperation). These data may include, but are not limited to: measures of coalition effectiveness; characteristics of coalitions and their numbers; descriptions of planned activities; changes in utilization of cancer control services; and, extent of media coverage and involvement. C. Phase III: Data Analysis and Reporting In conducting the analysis, researchers should consider features of the setting (e.g., geographic, social, economic, demographic, etc.) which may either facilitate or impede implementation of the project. In addition, recommendations should be made concerning the potential for generalization of the project to other rural settings. Although this phase will overlap certain periods of Phase II, it is anticipated that data collection, analysis, and reporting will be most intense during the last two years of the four-year award. This is also the period for special emphasis on the dissemination of program findings. The awardee institution retains custody and primary rights to the data consistent with current DHHS, PHS, and NIH policies. However, NCI will have access to all data and may periodically review the awardee's data management procedures. In addition to required annual progress reports, the awardee will provide semi-annual reports and additional information as requested by the NBLIC Program Director. A suggested format for these reports will be provided by the NBLIC Program Director. NCI program staff will review the progress of NBLIC through consideration of the annual reports, site visits, and reports from collaborative institutions/organizations. Special intermittent reports or additional information may be required for purposes involving programmatic expedience. Examples of information that should typically be included in the reports are the following: o Community Coalitions - List the number and composition of coalitions with a breakout of those established by NBLIC; list and describe coalition activities and results; list and describe community resources that are available to coalitions; list and describe the resources that may be needed and how these would be allocated and managed to enhance coalition activity. o Education, Health Advocacy and Research - Describe the level of involvement with health advocacy type activities (e.g., anti- tobacco/smoking campaigns, and cancer screening programs) and how the information disseminated by NBLIC staff parallels NCI endorsed research findings. o Cancer Survivor Support Groups - List the number and describe the types of such groups with a breakout of those established by NBLIC; describe the frequency and place of support group meetings; provide examples of agenda items or topics discussed and a brief profile of the leader(s); describe how these groups are supported by NBLIC. o Community Leadership - List the number of community leaders recruited, provide a profile of each, and describe the role each performs in furthering the project agenda. Reports should also describe any untoward effects of NBLIC activities and how these were/are/will be addressed or resolved. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS Terms and Conditions of Award The following special Terms and Conditions of Award will be incorporated into the award statement and provided to the institutional official at the time of award. They are in addition to and not in lieu of otherwise applicable OMB administrative guidelines; HHS Grant Administration Regulations at 45 CFR part 74 and 92, and other HHS, PHS, and NIH Grants Administration policies. The administrative and funding instrument to be used for this project will be a cooperative agreement (U01), an assistance mechanism in which substantial NCI scientific/programmatic involvement with the awardee is anticipated during performance of the activity. However, the awardee has the dominant role and prime responsibility for each activity and the project as a whole. The inability of the awardee to meet the performance requirements set forth in the Terms and Conditions of Award in the RFA, or significant changes in the level of performance, may result in an adjustment of funding, withholding of support, suspension or termination of award. A. Awardee Rights and Responsibilities o Plan, develop, implement, evaluate, and direct all aspects of the project. o Publish project results during Phase III. o Define the role and responsibilities of the NBLIC Steering Committee, select its members and provide funds for their travel and appropriate meeting-related expenses. o Apprise the NCI Program Director of plans to develop printed materials and media messages intended for programmatic purposes. o In addition to required annual progress reports, provide semi- annual reports and additional information as requested by the NBLIC Program Director. o Collect, analyze, publish, and present data and program findings; retain custody of and have primary rights to the data developed under this award subject to Government rights of access consistent with current HHS, PHS, and NIH policies. o Ensure the representation of appropriate NBLIC project staff at key meetings. o Develop a long-range plan for possible continued community activity and institutionalization of NBLIC after expiration of the four-year cooperative agreement. The plan may include such things as obtaining in-kind contributions, fostering volunteerism, pursuing cost-containment techniques, and establishing affiliations with health care provider groups and non-profit organizations. B. NCI Program Director Responsibilities o Provide assistance to the awardee regarding the quality and type of data to be used and its potential value to the project, and shall periodically review the use of such data and assist in determining further use. o Assist the awardee with planning project activities and establishing priorities; assist in establishing and maintaining effective communication channels. o Confer with the awardee regarding staffing needs; advise and assist in the selection of key staff; may approve or disapprove key personnel. o Serve as a member of the NBLIC Steering Committee and report to NCI. o Assist in recruiting specialized technical assistance that is deemed essential to the development and distribution of culturally competent program communication messages and materials. o Assist in publishing data findings and process activities; participate in writing and preparing publications in accordance with NIH staff publication policies; retain authority to approve publications and printing costs exceeding $25,000 for a single publication. o Coordinate special meetings to address NCI priority issues. C. Collaborative Responsibilities A NBLIC Steering Committee, composed of the Principal Investigator and the awardee's NBLIC Project Manager, NCI, NBLIC Program Director, and community leaders such as those currently serving as NBLIC regional chairpersons, will be established to provide guidance and support for program activities and to identify project-wide needs and resources. The committee will select a chairperson from among its ranks other than the NCI member. As needed, the NBLIC Steering Committee may establish subcommittees, such as a data and evaluation subcommittee, to focus on special issues. D. Arbitration Any disagreement that may arise on programmatic matters (within the scope of the award), between the award recipient and NCI may be brought to arbitration. An arbitration panel will be composed of three members -- one selected by the project's advisory committee (with the NCI Program Director not voting) or by the awardee in the event of an individual disagreement, a second member selected by the NCI Program Director, and the third member selected by the two prior selected members. This special arbitration procedure in no way affect the awardee's right to appeal an adverse action that is appealable in accordance with PHS regulations at 42 CFR part 50, subpart D and HHS regulation at 45 CFR part 16. INCLUSION OF WOMEN AND MINORITIES IN RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS It is the policy of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) that women and members of minority groups and their subpopulations must be included in all NIH-supported biomedical and behavioral research projects involving human subjects, unless a clear and compelling rationale and justification is provided that inclusion is inappropriate with respect to the health of the subjects or the purpose of the research. This new policy results from the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 (Section 492B of Public Law 103-43) and supersedes and strengthens the previous policies (Concerning the Inclusion of Women in Study Populations, and Concerning the Inclusion of Minorities in Study Populations) which have been in effect since 1990. The new policy contains some new provisions that are substantially different from the 1990 policies. Due to the nature of this solicitation, the requirement for inclusion of minorities is satisfied. Applicants must still describe the proposed population, including gender composition operation and outreach plans. All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the "NIH Guidelines on the Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical Research," which was reprinted in the Federal Register of March 28, 1994 (59 FR 14508-14513) to correct typesetting errors in the earlier publication, and reprinted in the NIH GUIDE FOR GRANTS AND CONTRACTS of March 18, 1994, Volume 23, Number 11. Investigators may obtain copies from these sources or from the program staff or contact person listed below. Program staff may also provide additional relevant information concerning the policy. LETTER OF INTENT Prospective applicants are asked to submit, by March 3, 1995, a letter of intent that includes a descriptive title of the proposed project, name, address, and telephone number of the principal investigator, identities of other key personnel and participating institutions, and number and title of the RFA in response to which the application is being submitted. Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not enter into the review of subsequent applications, the information allows NCI staff to estimate the potential review workload and to avoid conflict of interest in the review. The letter of intent is to be sent to Frank E. Jackson, NBLIC Program Director, at the address provided under INQUIRIES. APPLICATION PROCEDURES The research grant application form PHS 398 (rev. 9/91) is to be used in applying for this award. These forms are available at most local institutional offices of sponsored research; from the Office of Grants Information, Division of Research Grants, National Institutes of Health, 5333 Westbard Avenue, Room 449, Bethesda, MD 20892, telephone 301/584-7248. The RFA label available in the PHS 398 (rev. 9/91) application form must be affixed to the bottom of the face page of the application. Failure to use this label could result in delayed processing of the application such that it may not reach the review committee in time for review. In addition, the RFA title and number must be typed on line 2a of the face page of the application form and the "YES" box must be marked. Submit a signed, typed original of the application (without appendices), including the Checklist, and three signed, exact, clear, and single-sided photocopies, in one package to: Division of Research Grants National Institutes of Health Westwood Building, Room 240 Bethesda, MD 20892** At time of submission, two additional copies of the application must also be sent to: Ms. Toby Friedberg Division of Extramural Activities National Cancer Institute 6130 Executive Boulevard, Room 636 Rockville, MD 20852 It is important to send these copies at the same time that the original and three copies are sent to DRG; otherwise, the NCI cannot guarantee that the applications will be reviewed in competition with other applications received on or before the designated receipt date. Applications must be received by April 27, 1995. If an application is received after that date, it will be returned to the applicant without review. The Division of Research Grants (DRG) will not accept any application in response to this RFA that is essentially the same as one currently pending initial review, unless the applicant withdraws the pending application. The DRG will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one already reviewed. This does not preclude the submission of a substantial revision of an application already reviewed, but such an application must include an introduction addressing the previous critique. Include the following additional information on the application form PHS 398 continuation pages. o Document the applicant institution's experience with community- based health interventions, and describe the management systems that were effective in organizing the effort, monitoring project resources, and working with coalitions. o Attest to the adequacy and availability of facilities to be used for the project, such as office space and equipment. o Describe key personnel and their proposed duties as well as their current duties with the applicant institution. The level of effort of personnel on this project should reflect the commitment of the individual and the applicant institution to ensuring organizational efficiency and maximum resource utilization. Applicants should include an appropriately justified budget for each 12 month segment for a total of four years of funding, and describe the fiscal plan that will provide support for coalition activities, (e.g., meetings, mailings, programs, etc.). Travel estimates for the four year project period should include up to four meetings for the Steering Committee during the first year and one annual meeting for each group thereafter in Bethesda, MD. REVIEW CONSIDERATIONS Upon receipt, applications will be reviewed for completeness by the Division of Research Grants and responsiveness by the NCI. Incomplete and non-responsive applications will be returned to the applicant without further consideration. Applications that are complete and responsive to the RFA will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate peer review group convened by NCI in accordance with the review criteria stated below. As part of the initial merit review, a process (triage) may be used by the initial review group in which applications will be determined to be competitive or non-competitive based on their scientific merit relative to other applications received in response to the RFA. Applications judged to be competitive will be discussed and assigned a priority score. Applications determined to be non-competitive will be withdrawn from further consideration and the principal investigator/program director and the official signing for the applicant organization will be promptly notified. The second level of review will be performed by the National Cancer Advisory Board. This Board considers the special needs of NCI and the priorities of the National Cancer Program. Review Criteria Applications will be judged primarily on evidence of an understanding of the Black American community and its cancer control needs; the ability to access and obtain participation of the community, recruit community leaders, establish coalitions, and collaborate with other organizations; qualifications of the investigators, including community outreach experience, cultural competence, and cancer control and communications expertise; capability to perform the work proposed; and a demonstrated willingness to work together with collaborating entities and NCI staff. The following criteria will be used in the review: o Comprehensiveness, feasibility, and consistency of the proposed project plan with the goals and objectives of the RFA, and the extent to which the application demonstrates originality and an understanding of cancer control outreach activities as well as community coalition development; o Rationale for selection of the targeted geographic area and documentation of its cancer control needs including cancer-related risk factors, access and utilization of health care services, and cancer rates; o Adequacy and soundness of the staffing and project management plans, including evidence of the capability, experience, and qualifications of the awardee and cooperating institution's technical staffs to implement the project successfully and a good overall balance of the program team in relation to the objectives of the project; o Appropriateness of the implementation plan and the extent to which it demonstrates sensitivity to cultural and socioeconomic factors in the community, including evidence that these factors are significant targets of inclusion in community coalitions; o Evidence of program linkages to existing relevant federal, state, and local cancer control plans and activities in target communities, as well as a strategy for improving existing plans and stimulating their implementation; o Adequacy, appropriateness, feasibility, and comprehensiveness of the evaluation plan, including sufficient allocation of resources; o Adequacy of plans to include both genders and minorities and their subgroups as appropriate for the scientific goals of the research. Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects will also be evaluated. o Feasibility of the project within the resources and time frames proposed; appropriateness of the proposed budget and duration in relation to the proposed initiative; and inclusion of specific written agreements with cooperating institutions, including those agencies that may be providing services and/or the settings for these services. AWARD CRITERIA The anticipated award date is September 1995. Applicants will compete for funding based on the quality and merit of the proposed outreach program as determined by peer review. Cooperative agreement applications recommended by the National Cancer Advisory Board will be considered for award based upon (a) scientific and technical merit; (b) program balance, including in this instance, sufficient compatibility of features to make a successful collaborative program a reasonable likelihood; and (c) availability of funds. As with research grants, interim and terminal progress reports must be submitted to the NCI in accordance with the current PHS Grants Policy Statement. The interim progress reports will be a part of the noncompeting continuation application and should include the following information: (a) a brief statement and critique of progress toward achieving originally stated objectives; (b) a description or listing of related issues, positive or negative, considered to be significant by the awardee, and (c) plans for the next funding period. Terminal progress reports must be submitted within 90 days after the end of the project and should include items (a) and (b) above. INQUIRIES Inquiries concerning this RFA are encouraged. The opportunity to clarify any issues or questions from potential applicants is welcome. Direct inquiries regarding programmatic issues to: Frank E. Jackson Division of Cancer Prevention and Control National Cancer Institute Executive Plaza North, Room 240D Bethesda, MD 20892 Telephone: (301) 496-8589 FAX: (301) 496-8675 Email:Direct inquiries regarding fiscal matters to: Catherine E. Blount Grants Management Officer National Cancer Institute 6120 Executive Boulevard, Room 243 Bethesda, MD 20852 Telephone: (301) 496-7800 Ext. 262 AUTHORITY AND REGULATIONS This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 93.399. Awards are made under authorization of the Public Health Service Act, Title IV, Part A (Public Law 78- 410, as amended by Public Law 99-158, 42 USC 241 and 285) and administered under PHS grants policies and Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Part 74. This program is not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health Systems Agency review. The PHS strongly encourages all grant recipients to provide a smoke- free workplace and promote the non-use of all tobacco products. This is consistent with the PHS mission to protect and advance the physical and mental health of the American people. References 1. National Cancer Institute, SEER Cancer Statistics Review 1973-1991, NIH Publication No. 94-2789 2. Gail MH: A Review and Critique of Some Models Used in Competing Risk Analysis, Biometrics 31: 209-222, 1975. 3. National Center for Health Statistics. Health, United States, 1993, DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 94-1232. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1990. 4. Bennett, C.E.: The Black Population in the United States: March 1992, Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce 5. Hunkeler, E.F., et al.: Richmond Quits Smoking: A Minority Community Fights for Health, Health Promotion at the Community Level, Sage Publications, Newburg Park, CA, 1990 6. Jenkins, S.: Community Wellness: A Group Empowerment Model For Rural America, Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, Vol. 1, No.4, Spring 1991 .
Return to NIH Guide Main Index
Office of Extramural Research (OER) |
National Institutes of Health (NIH) 9000 Rockville Pike Bethesda, Maryland 20892 |
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) |
||||||||