National Institutes of Health (NIH)
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)
NIDCR Mentoring Network to Support a Diverse Dental, Oral and Craniofacial Research Workforce (UE5 Clinical Trial Not Allowed)
UE5 Education Projects - Cooperative Agreements
Only one application per institution is allowed, as defined in Section III. 3. Additional Information on Eligibility.
The NIH Research Education Projects Cooperative Agreements Program (UE5) supports research education activities in the mission areas of the NIH. The over-arching goal of this NIDCR UE5 program is to support educational activities that enhance the diversity of the biomedical, behavioral and clinical research workforce. The major goal of this UE5 program is to establish a mentoring network that will facilitate a diverse pool of early career investigators, including those from groups identified as underrepresented (see NOT-OD-18-210), to advancetheir research careers and/or transition to the next career stage and to develop a high quality independently funded research program. This FOA invites applications from senior faculty, experienced mentors and experienced researchers to develop and direct a mentoring network for eligible early career investigators (postdoctorates and junior faculty) to foster a career trajectory towards independent dental, oral and craniofacial health research.
To accomplish the stated over-arching goal, this FOA will support creative educational activities with a primary focus on Mentoring Activities and Courses for Skills Development.
Proposed programs are expected to contribute to the development of a skilled cadre of investigators in requisite scientific research areas to advance the objectives of the NIDCR Strategic Plan.
December 12, 2018
April 30, 2019
April 30, 2019
May 30, 2019, by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. All types of non-AIDS applications allowed for this funding opportunity announcement are due on this date.
No late applications will be accepted for this Funding Opportunity Annoucement.
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.
March 1, 2020
May 31, 2019
It is critical that applicants follow the Research (R) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide except where instructed to do otherwise (in this FOA or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts). Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions.
Applications that do not comply with these instructions will not be reviewed
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.
Part 1. Overview Information
Part 2. Full Text of the Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
Section II. Award Information
Section III. Eligibility Information
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
Section V. Application Review Information
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Section VII. Agency Contacts
Section VIII. Other Information
The over-arching goal of this NIDCR UE5program is to support educational activities that encourage early career investigators from diverse backgrounds, including those from groups underrepresented in the biomedical and behavioral sciences, to pursue careers in research.
The NIH recognizes a unique and compelling need to promote diversity in the NIH funded biomedical, behavioral, clinical, and social sciences workforce. The primary goal of this NIDCR program is to establish a mentoring network that will enable a diverse pool of early career investigators, including those from groups identified as underrepresented in the biomedical, behavioral, clinical and social sciences, (see NOT-OD-18-210), to develop professional career skills, to enhance professional career advancement and transition from one career stage to the next, such as postdoctoral scientists transitioning to junior faculty positions, or junior faculty achieving tenure, and to develop a high quality independently funded research program. The proposed program is expected to build a vibrant and inclusive community of investigators whose participation is vital to advancing dental, oral and craniofacial research and improving the oral health of our nation.
To accomplish the stated over-arching goal, this FOA will support creative educational activities with a primary focus on:
Programmatic Features of the NIDCR Mentoring Network
The NIDCR is seeking to provide research training opportunities that accommodate the diverse needs of the research workforce. It is envisioned that this program will develop a mentoring network focused on a diverse pool of early career stage investigators (program participants or mentees), including those from racial and ethnic groups underrepresented in scientific research and to include individuals with disabilities, as a means of providing emerging scientific talent with a pathway to NIH-funding success. This program is intended to enhance the ability of participants to achieve future NIH research grant support and research career independence.
The objectives of this mentoring network program are to: (1) advance the participants' research career development trajectories by strengthening grant writing skills, scientific publishing, and by participating in other scholarly activities; (2) improve the participants' retention and advancement in a research career; (3) enhance the diversity of a highly trained workforce in research areas of interest to the NIDCR.
Mentoring networks should be national and may be designed to link two, or partner with one or more complementary institutions/organizations including national scientific professional organizations. Applicants may consider how to leverage existing mentoring resources such as the NIH-funded National Research Mentoring Network or other similar resources to enhance the proposed mentoring activities.
It is anticipated that a cohort of ten participants per year, but not less than eight, will be selected and engaged in the mentoring network program activities. Participants should be actively engaged in the network for a time period of no less than one year, maintaining regular contact with mentors and peers within the network during that time. Continued and sustained engagement - among mentors and mentees, and among peer cohorts of mentees - beyond each participant's initial selection to the program is strongly encouraged.
It is anticipated that the proposed mentoring network will include a combination of innovative individualized mentoring, small group interactions and didactic training, such as workshops or regularly occurring webinars. Both formal and informal interactions between mentors and participants, and among participants (mentees) are expected. Mentoring plans can be designed for online, phone, and/or in-person interactions, and are encouraged to take advantage of contemporary communication strategies (e.g., social media), as appropriate, to achieve the goals of the network. A proposed network should provide new opportunities beyond any ongoing mentoring, networking, or research education within academic programs, institutions, or existing networks or educational collaborations among institutions. Time for peer mentoring activities and experiences should be included.
Mentors are expected to work with mentees to develop professional research career skills. In addition, activities may include working with the mentee to develop a research career timeline, short term and long term research goals, and defining research career milestones and benchmarks (intermediate milestones) of success.
A mentored NIH grant writing and review experience is expected to be provided to each new cohort of participants on a yearly basis. It is anticipated that applicants will propose at least one in-person meeting or workshop to facilitate this experience, which could be held in conjunction with a national scientific conference, or at any other appropriate time and location. It is expected that this activity will involve experienced investigators who can mentor in NIH grant writing, and that additional scientific experts will be recruited, as needed, to facilitate a mock NIH study section. Mentoring network participants are expected to submit subsequent grant applications for R01 support (or equivalent), or for mentored career development awards (e.g., NIDCR K01), depending on the career level and research goals of the participant. In addition, mentoring network in-person meetings may be used to provide courses/workshops on relevant topic areas, or to provide time for focused mentoring. Mentoring activities may include identifying appropriate grant mechanisms, providing review and feedback on draft research concepts or unfunded applications, and discussing progress on funded and ongoing research projects.
An expected outcome of the mentored NIH grant writing experience is submission of a grant application to the NIH within two years after a participant's completion of their initial year of engagement in the mentoring network. The expectation is that through a sustained period of mentorship augmented by the development of grant writing and an array of research career skills, participants will develop enhanced professional career capabilities in dental, oral and craniofacial sciences and will be better prepared to develop a high quality independently funded research program.
Other desired program outcomes include mentees' progression in their academic research careers as evidenced by: authorship of peer-reviewed scientific publications, scientific presentations, career advancement or promotion in dental, oral and craniofacial research or research-related academic or other professional positions, and independent research grant support from NIH or other funding source(s). Applications submitted in response to this funding opportunity announcement (FOA) must include an evaluation plan to assess the participants' progress and professional research career accomplishments, and to assess overall mentoring network program goals and accomplishments.
NIH's Interest in Diversity
Every facet of the United States scientific research enterprise—from basic laboratory research to clinical and translational research to policy formation–requires superior intellect, creativity and a wide range of skill sets and viewpoints. NIH’s ability to help ensure that the nation remains a global leader in scientific discovery and innovation is dependent upon a pool of highly talented scientists from diverse backgrounds who will help to further NIH's mission.
In spite of tremendous advancements in scientific research, information, education, and research opportunities are not equally available to all. Data from the National Science Foundation (NSF) show that certain groups of people including persons with disabilities, Blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians or Alaska Natives are underrepresented among academic research faculty and postdoctorates, and that Blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians or Alaska Natives are underrepresented at Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor academic ranks, see https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2017/nsf17310/data.cfm, Table 9-22 (academic position), Table 9-27 (race, ethnicity, faculty rank), and Table 9-28 (disability and faculty rank). These data show underrepresentation of certain groups of people among academic faculty and in scientific research positions remains an important problem that the entire research enterprise must actively address.
In 2012, the Advisory Committee to the NIH Director (ACD) endorsed a report prepared by the ACD Working Group on Diversity in the Biomedical Research Workforce (https://acd.od.nih.gov/documents/reports/DiversityBiomedicalResearchWorkforceReport.pdf) aimed toward improving the recruitment and retention of underrepresented minorities, people with disabilities, and people from disadvantaged backgrounds across the lifespan of a biomedical research career. The report identified the important role of mentoring in graduate students and postdoctorates in ultimately achieving independent research positions in universities and successfully competing for NIH grants. Recommendations to support the research career development of postdoctorates and junior faculty, including those from underrepresented groups, highlight culturally appropriate mentoring, mentorship networks, and the development of mentee grantwriting skills facilitated by established, well respected scientists to enhance the mentees' ability to advance in their research career and successfully compete for research funding.
Mentorship, including mentorship by senior experienced academic mentors, scientific mentors, and peers has been shown to be an effective intervention for supporting junior clinician-scientists, particularly among women and underrepresented minorities in their career development, career transition, academic achievements, and retention in academic research (Byington et al., 2016; Kuhn and Castaño 2016; Mayer et al., 2014;Harawa et al., 2017).
The activities proposed in this FOA are based on these data and recommendations. The goal of the FOA is to develop a mentoring network to enhance the research career trajectory of a diverse pool of early career investigators, including those from groups underrepresented in the biomedical, clinical, behavioral and social sciences research enterprise (see NOT-OD-18-210).
NIDCR's Interest in Diversity
The NIDCR is committed to promoting the diversity of the dental, oral and craniofacial research workforce, and to being inclusive of the Nation’s population and supporting opportunities for members of historically underrepresented groups to participate in the biomedical research enterprise, and bring their inquiry, experiences and points to view to bear on research, discovery, and the improvement of human health. NIDCR encourages multidisciplinary research training and career development to prepare a workforce that can address complex oral health problems in a highly diverse U.S. population, and can contribute to the realization of the NIDCR Strategic Plan.
NIDCR's mission is to conduct and support research, research training, health information dissemination, and other programs with respect to dental, oral and craniofacial health and disease. NIDCR seeks to support an ample and diverse pipeline of highly competent investigators with the appropriate skills to conduct oral health research in an increasingly complex environment. NIDCR is committed to i) improving the recruitment of individuals from groups underrepresented in research, including those with disabilities and members of underrepresented racial and ethnic groups; ii) cultivating and sustaining future leaders in clinical and translational research, and iii) developing researchers with interdisciplinary skills to address multipronged issues in oral health. This includes the support of basic, clinical, behavioral and social science research concerning the etiology, epidemiology, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of dental, oral and craniofacial disorders and diseases. In this context, the NIDCR emphasizes research on caries and periodontal diseases; oral infections (viral, fungal, and bacterial), host-responses to oral infections (e.g., innate and adaptive immune responses), biofilms and microbial ecology, genomics and proteomics; oral aspects of HIV/AIDS infection and other systemic diseases; head and neck cancers; craniofacial development, physiology and malformations; orofacial pain and other oral sensory and motor dysfunctions; salivary glands and disorders such as Sjögren's Syndrome; temporomandibular joint disorders; and restoration and regeneration of dental, oral and craniofacial structures.
Research education programs may complement ongoing research training and education occurring at the applicant institution, but the proposed educational experiences must be distinct from those training and education programs currently receiving Federal support. UE5 programs may augment institutional research training programs (e.g., T32, T90) but cannot be used to replace or circumvent Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) programs.
See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.
Cooperative Agreement: A support mechanism used when there will be substantial Federal scientific or programmatic involvement.
The OER Glossary and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on these application types.
Not Allowed: Only accepting applications that do not propose clinical trial(s).
NIDCR intends to commit $300,000 in FY2020 to fund one award.
Application budgets may not exceed direct costs of $250,000 per year.
The maximum project period is 5 years.
Individuals designing, directing, and implementing the research education program may request salary and fringe benefits appropriate for the person months devoted to the program. Salaries requested may not exceed the levels commensurate with the institution's policy for similar positions and may not exceed the congressionally mandated cap. (If mentoring interactions and other activities with participants are considered a regular part of an individual's academic duties, then any costs associated with the mentoring and other interactions with participants are not allowable costs from grant funds).
Administrative and clerical salary costs distinctly associated with the program that are not normally provided by the applicant organization may be direct charges to the grant only when specifically identified and justified. Salary support for the PD/PI or multiple PDs/PIs directly associated with directing, coordinating, administering, and implementing the program should be well-justified, and reasonable.
Program coordinators are allowed as long as their role is clearly defined and significantly different from the roles of the PD(s)/PI(s). The duties and responsibilities of the program coordinators, with strong justification, must be included in the budget justification
Total personnel costs may not exceed 25% of the total direct costs in any year (not including consultant fees associated with program faculty outside of the grantee institution).
Participants are early career investigators involved in the mentoring network program as mentees, and will be recruited nationally.
It is a goal of this initiative that an annual meeting will be convened to bring together mentees and mentors/program faculty to participate in a mock NIH peer review and other mentorship activitties. Travel to this meeting should be included in the proposed budget.
While generally not an allowable cost, with strong justification, participants in the research education program may receive per diem unless such costs are furnished as part of a registration fee.
Participant costs must be justified as specifically required for the execution of the proposed activities of the program. . Participants in the program may receive funds to defray meals, lodging, and travel expenses. Tuition and stipends are not allowed. Expenses for foreign travel are not allowed.
The application should provide a description of any expected cost sharing (financial and otherwise) being provided by a mentee's home institution to assist in covering or defraying costs associated with mentee participation in the annual meeting or other program activities.
Individuals supported by NIH training and career development mechanisms (K, T, or F awards) may receive, and are encouraged to receive, educational experiences supported by a UE5 program as participants, but may not receive salary or stipend supplementation from a research education program.
Because the UE5 program is not intended as a substitute for an NRSA institutional training program (e.g., T32, T90), costs to support full-time participants (supported for 40 hours/week for a continuous, 12-month period) are not allowable.
Consultant costs, equipment, supplies, travel for key persons, and other program-related expenses may be included in the proposed budget. These expenses must be justified as specifically required by the proposed program and must not duplicate items generally available at the applicant institution. Costs to support mentor or other program faculty participation in the program may be included in the proposed budget, but must not duplicate items generally available at the applicant institution or to program faculty at their home institution.
Indirect Costs (also known as Facilities & Administrative [F&A] Costs) are reimbursed at 8% of modified total direct costs (exclusive of tuition and fees and expenditures for equipment), rather than on the basis of a negotiated rate agreement.
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made from this FOA.
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
sponsoring institution must assure support for the proposed program. Appropriate
institutional commitment to the program includes the provision of adequate
staff, facilities, and educational resources that can contribute to the planned
Institutions with existing Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) institutional training grants (e.g., T32) or other Federally funded training programs may apply for a research education grant provided that the proposed educational experiences are distinct from those training programs receiving federal support. In many cases, it is anticipated that the proposed research education program will complement ongoing research training occurring at the applicant institution.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are
not eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are not allowed.
Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as possible. The NIH Policy on Late Submission of Grant Applications states that failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission.
Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))
All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account. PD(s)/PI(s) should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate their existing account with the applicant organization in eRA Commons. If the PD/PI is also the organizational Signing Official, they must have two distinct eRA Commons accounts, one for each role. Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.
Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources
necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal
Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with his/her organization to
develop an application for support. Individuals from diverse backgrounds,
including underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, individuals with
disabilities, and women are always encouraged to apply for NIH support.
For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
The PD/PI should be an established investigator in the scientific area in which the application is targeted and capable of providing both administrative and scientific leadership to the development and implementation of the proposed program. The PD/PI will be expected to monitor and assess the program and submit all documents and reports as required.
The PD/PI should be a senior faculty member and have a strong track record as an NIH funded investigator, educator and experienced mentor, and should be capable of directing the NIDCR mentoring network program and of providing mentorship and professional research career education experiences to participants, including individuals from groups underrepresented in the biomedical sciences (see NOT-OD-18-210).
The PD/PI should be capable of providing both administrative and scientific leadership to the development and implementation of the program, or of providing evidence of a team that has these capabilities. The PD/PI or PD/PI team should have scientific leadership and background in NIDCR research topic areas, as evidenced by scientific publications and a record of peer-reviewed research support, and must be actively engaged in research in an area related to the mission of the NIDCR.
If a PD/PI team is proposed, members must have experience and leadership in mentoring and should have a strong record of providing mentorship and professional research career education experiences to individuals underrepresented in the biomedical sciences (see NOT-OD-18-210). For example, a PD/PI with strong scientific experience and expertise could partner with a PD/PI who has mentorship and leadership experience to fulfill the requirements for leadership of this program.
This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Only one application per institution (normally identified by having a unique DUNS number or NIH IPF number) is allowed.
The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time. This means that the NIH will not accept:
Researchers from diverse backgrounds, including racial and ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities, and women are encouraged to participate in the mentoring network program as mentors, course instructors or scientific experts. Individuals may have more than one role in the program. Program faculty should have research expertise and experience in areas relevant to the proposed program, and in areas of their proposed role(s) in the program.
Program PD(s)/PI(s) are expected to recruit mentors and other program faculty nationally. Program faculty should be established investigators defined by a history of active or recent peer reviewed research funding (e.g., R01 or equivalent) and a record of peer reviewed research publications in scientific areas that align with the propsed program. Mentors should have considerable experience mentoring postdoctorates and/or early career faculty who have continued in research intensive careers. Mentors must be committed to continue their involvement throughout the total period of the mentee’s participation in this award.
Unless strongly justified on the basis of exceptional relevance to NIH, research education programs should be used primarily for the education of U.S. citizens and permanent residents.
For the purpose of this funding opportunity announcement, applicants are encouraged to recruit participants nationally from a diverse pool of early career investigators, including those from groups that are underrepresented in the biomedical sciences (see NOT-OD-18-210).
Participants for this award must have a research and/or health-professional doctoral degree or equivalent. The candidates must have postdoctoral research experience and be committed to developing into independent investigators in research areas relevant to the mission of the NIDCR. Candidates may be in postdoctoral or junior faculty positions. Tenured faculty are not eligible for the program.
Eligible participants include:
In planning their mentee pool, applicants to this FOA should note that potential mentees must submit a letter of support from their department chair or dean that includes a commitment to provide protected time for mentee participation in the program, and financial support to help defray the cost of participation the mentoring network program activities.
The application forms package specific to this opportunity must be accessed through ASSIST, Grants.gov Workspace or an institutional system-to-system solution. Links to apply using ASSIST or Grants.gov Workspace are available in Part 1 of this FOA. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution.
It is critical that applicants follow the Research (R) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed in this funding opportunity announcement to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions will not be reviewed.
Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information that it contains allows IC staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review.
By the date listed in Part 1. Overview Information, prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:
The letter of intent should be sent to:
Yasaman Shirazi, PhD
All page limitations described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
Instructions for Application Submission
The following section supplements the instructions found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this FOA.
Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide with the following additional modifications:
Facilities & Other Resources. Describe the educational environment, including the facilities, laboratories, participating departments, computer services, and any other resources to be used in the development and implementation of the proposed program. List all thematically related sources of support for research training and education following the format for Current and Pending Support.
If some of the program activities will take place at other institutions, provide a description of the facilities and other resources at those institutions as noted above.
If some of the program activities will take place at other locations, for example, in partnership with national professional society meetings, provide a brief overview of the usual format for the meeting, resources available for the anticipated activities, and meeting location e.g., convention center, hotel or other area.
Other Attachments. An Advisory Committee is not a required component of a Research Education program. However, if an Advisory Committee is intended, provide a plan for the appointment of an Advisory Committee to monitor progress of the mentoring network program. The composition, roles, responsibilities, and desired expertise of committee members, frequency of committee meetings, and other relevant information should be included. Describe how the Advisory Committee will evaluate the overall effectiveness of the program. Proposed Advisory Committee members should be named in the application if they have been invited to participate at the time the application is submitted. Please name your file “Advisory_Committee.pdf”
Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide with the following additional modifications:
Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
The Research Strategy section must be used to upload the Research Education Program Plan, which must include the following components described below:
Research Education Program Plan
Proposed Research Education Program. While the proposed research education program may complement ongoing research training and education occurring at the applicant institution, the proposed educational experiences must be distinct from those research training and research education programs currently receiving federal support. When research training programs are on-going in the same department, the applicant organization should clearly distinguish between the activities in the proposed research education program and the research training supported by the training program.
Applicants should propose a program that includes mentoring and interactive opportunities in areas of professional research career development and progression, along with potential scientific areas, as the framework for the proposed mentoring network. Describe the rationale for the proposed mentoring model, the professional development areas, and scientific areas chosen, and the relationship of the scientific areas to the NIDCR mission and NIDCR Strategic Plan. The proposed content areas should be of sufficient breadth to ensure the ability to recruit a high-quality pool of potential participants annually and to ensure that a critical mass of mentors and participants is involved in the mentoring network. The network should enhance the participants' professional development, career advancement, and foster their career trajectories towards independent dental, oral and craniofacial health research.
Describe the framework for, and the components of, the proposed mentoring network, e.g., the rationale, the grounding in experience and pedagogical theory, and the justification in terms of the long-term goals of the proposed mentoring network.
Describe the proposed structure of the network. It is expected that a combination of didactic interactions such as workshops, seminars, and/or regularly occurring webinars, one-on-one, and small group discussions are likely components of any proposed mentoring network. Both formal and informal interactions between mentors and participants, and among participants (peers) are expected. Applicants are encouraged to take advantage of contemporary communication strategies, e.g., online, teleconference, and social media, as appropriate for the goals of their network.
Describe how state-of-the-art approaches to mentoring, professional academic research career development and scholarship will be employed in the network. Describe how an annual mentored NIH grant writing and mentored peer review experience will be accomplished. Describe the processes to facilitate and develop sustained mentor-participant interaction and engagement over the mentoring network program project period and beyond.
Describe how the network complements existing training or didactic opportunities (as appropriate). Provide topic areas and programmatic detail on the specific activities proposed, e.g., workshops, seminars, curricula, involvement in hands-on mentoring/professional research career skills activities at the home institution or other institution/organization. A sample schedule of annual activities for each cohort of participants is recommended, along with a description of specific activities that may extended over multiple years of the program to enhance sustained mentorship and engagement of the participants.
If multiple institutions/organizations are involved in the mentoring network, the applicant institution must be one of the sites involved in program activities. The need for and use of multiple sites must be justified. All institutions/organizations participating in a single collaborative multisite application should be clearly involved in the planning, implementation, and assessment of the program.
Describe expected processes for: (a) planning and implementing the proposed mentoring and skill development activities, (b) selecting mentors, (c) selecting participants, (d) matching mentor(s) for participants (each participant must have a primary mentor, and co-mentors or mentoring teams are encouraged), (e) developing participant (peer) interactions/networks, (g) recruiting and selecting scientific experts for the mentored grant application writing and review activities, and (f) if applicable, coordinating among existing training or research activities available at a site or across multiple sites.
Note that there should be a clear “value added” from the proposed UE5-supported mentoring network. Describe how the mentoring network may be modified over time depending upon the outcome of initial progress and participant feedback and/or new developments in the field, in order to ensure that the mentoring and skills development education experiences continue to be cutting edge.
If applicable, describe the role of the mentoring network advisory committee and how it will provide guidance to the PD(s)/PI(s) in meeting the goals of the program.
Program Director/Principal Investigator. Describe arrangements for administration of the program. Provide evidence that the Program Director/Principal Investigator is actively engaged in research and/or teaching in an area related to the mission of NIH, and can organize, administer, monitor, and evaluate the research education program. For programs proposing multiple PDs/PIs, describe the complementary and integrated expertise of the PDs/PIs; their leadership approach, and governance appropriate for the planned project.
PDs/PIs should be actively engaged in research that will advance the objectives of the NIDCR Strategic Plan. Provide evidence that the PD/PI has a strong track record as a leader, educator and/or mentor in an areas relevant to the scientific focus and activities in the proposed mentoring network. If a PD/PI team or multiple PDs/PIs are proposed, their roles must be clearly defined and justfied.
Program Faculty. Researchers from diverse backgrounds, including racial and ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities, and women are encouraged to participate as program faculty. Faculty should have research expertise and experience relevant to the proposed program and demonstrate a history of, or the potential for, their intended roles.
Describe the qualifications and responsibilities of the participating faculty. Program faculty may have one or more mentoring roles as course instructor, one-on-one mentor or co-mentor, and scientific expert mentor for mock peer review of NIH grant applications. Describe the anticipated number of individuals (instructors, mentors, scientific experts) who will participate in the mentoring network, their desired qualifications, and recruiment and selection stategies from institutions or other organzations.
Mentors are expected to be established investigators defined by recent or active peer reviewed research funding and peer reviewed research publications, and to have experience mentoring early career investigators, such as postdoctoral fellows and/or junior faculty members, who have continued in research intensive careers. Program faculty members with experience in effective approaches to mentoring early career including culturally appropriate mentorship are encouraged.
Researchers from diverse backgrounds, including racial and ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities, women, and LGBTQ persons are encouraged to participate in the program. Program faculty should provide a letter of support documenting their role(s), commitment, and willingness to participate in the program (see Letters of Support).
Program Participants. Applications must describe the intended participants, and the eligibility criteria and/or specific educational background characteristics that are essential for participation in the proposed research education program. Identify the career levels for which the proposed program is planned.
Provide details about recruiting and selecting up to ten (and no less than eight) new participants per year over the duration of the program. Describe the pool of expected participants, including academic and/or health professional degree characteristics and career levels, qualifications, and sources of this pool. Applications may also address how participation by the intended participants would further the goals of this NIDCR mentoring network program, consistent with the NIH's Interest in Diversity (NOT-OD-18-210). Provide strategies for recruiting participants nationally and for recruitment of an applicant pool that is predominantly composed of U.S. citizens and permanent residents. Describe plans for announcing and advertising the network opportunities, application procedures, and criteria for the evaluation and selection of participants. Include information about plans to recruit and select participants whose research interests align with the strategic objectives of the NIDCR.
It is expected that each participant's home institution will be strongly committed to the participant's research career success and involvement in the program. As such, as part of the recruitment and selection process, include plans to obtain a letter from the mentee's institutution describing commitment to providing protected time and finanancial support for the mentee's participation in the program. The letter of must be from the department chair or dean. The amount of the financial commitment requested of a participant's home institution to help defray the cost of participating in program activities should be communicated in the recruitment process.
Institutional Environment and Commitment. Describe the institutional environment, reiterating the availability of facilities and educational resources (described separately under “Facilities & Other Resources”), that can contribute to the planned Research Education Program. Evidence of institutional commitment to the research educational program is required. A letter of institutional commitment must be attached as part of Letters of Support (see below). Appropriate institutional commitment should include the provision of adequate staff, facilities, and educational resources that can contribute to the planned research education program.
If multiple institutions/organizations are participating in a single application, the applicant institution must document the requisite administrative/technical capacity and support for the management of a collaborative multisite mentoring network program.
In a multisite application, each of the collaborative sites must include a letter of institutional commitment that provides, as appropriate, the names of program faculty involved in the program, a description of facilities and educational resources available for the proposed program, and a letter of institutional commitment to the mentoring network program. These letters must be attached as part of the Letters of Support.
Recruitment Plan to Enhance Diversity (NOT-OD-18-210): Every facet of the United States scientific research enterprise—from basic laboratory research to clinical and translational research to policy formation–requires superior intellect, creativity and a wide range of skill sets and viewpoints . NIH’s ability to help ensure that the nation remains a global leader in scientific discovery and innovation is dependent upon a pool of highly talented scientists from diverse backgrounds who will help to further NIH's mission.
Research shows that diverse teams working together and capitalizing on innovative ideas and distinct perspectives outperform homogenous teams. Scientists and trainees from diverse backgrounds and life experiences bring different perspectives, creativity, and individual enterprise to address complex scientific problems. There are many benefits that flow from a diverse NIH-supported scientific workforce, including: fostering scientific innovation, enhancing global competitiveness, contributing to robust learning environments, improving the quality of the researchers, advancing the likelihood that underserved or health disparity populations participate in, and benefit from health research, and enhancing public trust.
A. Underrepresented Populations in the U.S. Biomedical,
Clinical, Behavioral and Social Sciences Research Enterprise
In spite of tremendous advancements in scientific research, information, educational and research opportunities are not equally available to all. NIH encourages institutions to diversify their student and faculty populations to enhance the participation of individuals from groups that are underrepresented in the biomedical, clinical, behavioral and social sciences, such as: Individuals from racial and ethnic groups that have been shown by the National Science Foundation to be underrepresented in health-related sciences on a national basis (see data at http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/showpub.cfm?TopID=2&SubID=27) and the report Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering).
The following racial and ethnic groups have been shown to be underrepresented in biomedical research: Blacks or African Americans, Hispanics or Latinos, American Indians or Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders.
In addition, it is recognized that underrepresentation can vary from setting to setting; individuals from racial or ethnic groups that can be demonstrated convincingly to be underrepresented by the grantee institution should be encouraged to participate in this program. For more information on racial and ethnic categories and definitions, see NOT-OD-15-089.
B. Individuals with disabilities, who are defined as those with a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, as described in the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended. See NSF data at https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2017/nsf17310/static/data/tab7-5.pdf
C. Individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds, defined as:
1.Individuals who come from a family with an annual income below established low-income thresholds. These thresholds are based on family size, published by the U.S. Bureau of the Census; adjusted annually for changes in the Consumer Price Index; and adjusted by the Secretary for use in all health professions programs. The Secretary periodically publishes these income levels at http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/index.shtml.
2.Individuals who come from an educational environment such as that found in certain rural or inner-city environments that has demonstrably and directly inhibited the individual from obtaining the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary to develop and participate in a research career.
The disadvantaged background category (C1 and C2) refers to the financial and educational background of individuals, particularly before graduating from high school, while residing in the United States.
Literature shows that women from the above backgrounds (categories A, B, and C) face particular challenges at the graduate level and beyond in scientific fields. (See, e.g., Inside the Double Bind, A Synthesis of Empirical Research on Undergraduate and Graduate Women of Color in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics http://her.hepg.org/content/t022245n7x4752v2/fulltext.pdf).
New applications must include a description of plans to enhance recruitment, including the strategies that will be used to enhance the recruitment of Participants from underrepresented backgrounds and may wish to include data in support of past accomplishments.
Additional information on the required Recruitment
Plan to Enhance Diversity is available at Frequently Asked Questions:
Recruitment Plan to Enhance Diversity (Diversity
Applications lacking a diversity recruitment plan will not be reviewed.
for Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research. All
applications must include a plan to fulfill NIH requirements for instruction in
the Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR). The plan must address the five,
required instructional components outlined in the NIH policy: 1) Format - the required
format of instruction, i.e., face-to-face lectures, coursework, and/or real-time
discussion groups (a plan with only on-line instruction is not acceptable); 2) Subject Matter - the
breadth of subject matter, e.g., conflict of interest, authorship, data
management, human subjects and animal use, laboratory safety, research misconduct,
research ethics; 3) Faculty
Participation - the role of the program faculty in the instruction;
4) Duration of Instruction - the number of contact hours of instruction, taking into consideration the
duration of the program; and 5) Frequency
of Instruction –instruction must occur during each career stage and
at least once every four years. See also NOT-OD-10-019.
The plan should be appropriate and reasonable for the nature and duration of the
Applications lacking a plan for instruction in responsible conduct of research will not be reviewed.
Evaluation Plan. Applications must include a plan for evaluating the activities supported by the award. The application must specify baseline metrics (e.g., numbers, educational levels, and demographic characteristics of participants), as well as measures to gauge the short or long-term success of the research education award in achieving its objectives. Applicants are encouraged to obtain feedback from participants to help identify weaknesses and to provide suggestions for improvements.
The evaluation plan should include a timeline and specific and detailed plans for evaluation of both the program mentees and program faculty. Mechanisms to obtain feedback from the participants on the impact and value of courses/workshops/seminars should be described, along with how the accomplishment of program objectives and activities will be measured and evaluated.
The evaluation plan must assess the effectiveness of the program in terms of the mentees' perceptions of the mentoring network activities, including courses for skills development, and conduct of the program, as well as the longer-term impact, as measured by mentees' success in receipt of external funding from NIH, other government agencies, private foundations, or other sources.
The evaluation plan should also include an assessment of the overall performance of the mentoring network program and must be ongoing to permit evidence-based modification of specific activities (e.g., recruitment strategies) or comprehensive program activities.
Dissemination Plan. A specific plan must be provided to disseminate nationally any findings resulting from or materials developed under the auspices of the research education program, e.g., sharing course curricula and related materials via web postings, presentations at scientific meetings, workshops.
Letters of Support
A letter of institutional commitment must be attached as part of Letters of Support (see section above:”Institutional Environment and Commitment.
All Program Faculty involved in the mentoring network should submit letters of support.
Resource Sharing Plans
Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide,
When relevant, applications are expected to include a software dissemination plan if support for development, maintenance, or enhancement of software is requested in the application. There is no prescribed single license for software produced. However, the software dissemination plan should address, as appropriate, the following goals:
Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow the instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
When involving NIH-defined human subjects research, clinical research, and/or clinical trials (and when applicable, clinical trials research experience) follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered “Yes” to the question “Are Human Subjects Involved?” on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or Delayed Onset Study record.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Delayed Onset Study
Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start).
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Note: This institutional funding opportuntiy does not provide support for participants' independent research projects or reseach experiences. As such, this funding opportunity does not support human subjects research, clinical trials, or delayed onset studies.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
See Part 1. Section III.1 for information regarding the requirement for obtaining a unique entity identifier and for completing and maintaining active registrations in System for Award Management (SAM), NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code (if applicable), eRA Commons, and Grants.gov
Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission. When a submission date falls on a weekend or Federal holiday, the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day.
Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies). Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH’s electronic system for grants administration. NIH and Grants.gov systems check the application against many of the application instructions upon submission. Errors must be corrected and a changed/corrected application must be submitted to Grants.gov on or before the application due date and time. If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late. Applications that miss the due date and time are subjected to the NIH Policy on Late Application Submission.
Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.
Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost
principles, and other considerations described in the NIH
Grants Policy Statement.
Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.
Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.
For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit How to Apply – Application Guide. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Dealing with System Issues guidance. For assistance with application submission, contact the Application Submission Contacts in Section VII.
All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile Component of the SF424(R&R) Application Package. Failure to register in the Commons and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the successful submission of an electronic application to NIH.
The applicant organization must ensure that the DUNS number it provides on the application is the same number used in the organization’s profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Management (SAM). Additional information may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
See more tips for avoiding common errors.
Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with application instructions by the Center for Scientific Review and responsiveness by NIDCR, NIH. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy. Any instructions provided here are in addition to the instructions 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 announcement, note the following: The goal of this UE5 program is to support mentoring and educational activities that enhance the diversity of the biomedical, behavioral and clinical research workforce. A major goal of this program is to establish long-term mentoring that will enable a diverse pool of early career investigators, including those from groups that are underrepresented in the biomedical sciences (see NOT-OD-18-210), to advance their research careers and/or transition to the next career stage and to develop a high quality independently funded research program.
Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to strongly advance research education by fulfilling the goal of this R25 Education Program, 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.
Does the proposed program address a key audience and an important aspect or important need in research education? Is there convincing evidence in the application that the proposed program will significantly advance the stated goal of the program? How likely is implementation of the proposed program to enhance the professional development of the participants and foster their career trajectories towards independent dental, oral and craniofacial health research through the proposed mentoring network and activities?
Is the PD/PI capable of providing both administrative and scientific leadership to the development and implementation of the proposed program? Is there evidence that an appropriate level of effort will be devoted by the program leadership to ensure the program's intended goal is accomplished? If applicable, is there evidence that the participating faculty have experience in mentoring students and teaching science? If applicable, are the faculty good role models for the participants by nature of their scientific accomplishments? 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?
Is the caliber of program leadership and participating faculty, in terms of their research expertise, independent research funding, record of mentorship, and research education leadership in the areas of the proposed program, appropriate for their roles on the project?
Does the program leadership team demonstrate the ability to develop and implement metrics for meaningful evaluation of program activities and of short and long-term outcomes?
Taking into consideration the nature of the proposed research education program, does the applicant make a strong case for this program effectively reaching an audience in need of the program’s offerings? Where appropriate, is the proposed program developing or utilizing innovative approaches and latest best practices to improve the knowledge and/or skills of the intended audience?
Are the proposed mentoring concepts and strategies utilizing innovative approaches and latest best practices for the intended program participants (mentees)?
Does the proposed program clearly state its goals and objectives, including the educational level of the audience to be reached, the content to be conveyed, and the intended outcome? Is there evidence that the program is based on a sound rationale, as well as sound educational concepts and principles? Is the plan for evaluation sound and likely to provide information on the effectiveness of the program? If the proposed program will recruit participants, are the planned recruitment, retention, and follow-up (if applicable) activities adequate to ensure a highly qualified participant pool?
How adequate is the plan for providing mentees with appropriate mentoring experiences? Does the application contain adequate plans for recruiting experienced progam faculty/mentors with relevant scientific backgrounds? If an Advisory Committee is planned, are its composition and role appropriate to the program?
Are the methods, including networking strategies, group and one-on-one interactions, and didactics appropriate for the program objectives? Is sufficient interaction planned among program faculty and participants to achieve the goals of the network? Is there adequate description of the sources of the pool of expected participants and their qualifications? Are the stated plans for announcing and advertising the network, recruiting participants nationally, application procedures, and criteria for evaluation and selection of participants appropriate to achieve a highly qualified cohort of participants? Does the application contain adequate plans for national recruitment of candidates from diverse backgrounds? Does the application adequately document the host institutions', any collaborating partners', and faculty/mentors' willingness and commitment to participate in the NIDCR mentoring network program?
Will the scientific and educational environment of the proposed program contribute to its intended goals? Is there a plan to take advantage of this environment to enhance the educational value of the program? Is there tangible evidence of institutional commitment? Is there evidence that the faculty have sufficient institutional support to create a sound educational environment for the participants? Where appropriate, is there evidence of collaboration and buy-in among participating programs, departments, and institutions?
Are adequate plans provided for coordination and communication among multiple sites (if appropriate) Are the facilities, environment, and resources adequate for the proprosed program?
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.
For research that involves human subjects but does
not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part
46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human
subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their
participation according to the following five review criteria: (1) risk to
subjects, (2) adequacy of protection against risks, (3) potential benefits to
the subjects and others, (4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and (5)
data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: (1) the justification for the exemption, (2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and (3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.
When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults) to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.
The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following criteria: (1) description of proposed procedures involving animals, including species, strains, ages, sex, and total number to be used; (2) justifications for the use of animals versus alternative models and for the appropriateness of the species proposed; (3) interventions to minimize discomfort, distress, pain and injury; and (4) justification for euthanasia method if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. Reviewers will assess the use of chimpanzees as they would any other application proposing the use of vertebrate animals. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section.
Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.
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.
How robust is the proposed evaluation plan that will document the achievement of the program's objectives and demonstrate attainment of the program's goals? Are the evaluation plan and timeline adequate for determining outcomes and assessing if the program is achieving its goals and objectives? Is the proposed evaluation plan adequate for obtaining feedback from mentees to measure the quality and effectiveness of the program activities?
Peer reviewers will separately evaluate the recruitment plan to enhance diversity after the overall score has been determined. Reviewers will examine the strategies to be used in the recruitment of individuals from underrepresented groups. The review panel’s evaluation will be included in the summary statement. Plans will be rated as acceptable or unacceptable, and the summary statement will provide the consensus of the review committee.
Taking into account the specific characteristics of the proposed research education program, the level of participant experience, the reviewers will evaluate the adequacy of the proposed RCR training in relation to the following five required components: 1) Format - the required format of instruction, i.e., face-to-face lectures, coursework, and/or real-time discussion groups (a plan with only on-line instruction is not acceptable); 2) Subject Matter - the breadth of subject matter, e.g., conflict of interest, authorship, data management, human subjects and animal use, laboratory safety, research misconduct, research ethics; 3) Faculty Participation - the role of the program faculty in the instruction; 4) Duration of Instruction - the number of contact hours of instruction, taking into consideration the duration of the program; and 5) Frequency of Instruction –instruction must occur during each career stage and at least once every four years. See also: NOT-OD-10-019. The review panel’s evaluation will be included in the summary statement. Plans will be rated as acceptable or unacceptable, and the summary statement will provide the consensus of the review committee.
Generally not applicable. Reviewers should bring any concerns to the attention of the Scientific Review Officer.
Reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources, are reasonable: 1) Data Sharing Plan; 2) Sharing Model Organisms; and 3) Genomic Data Sharing Plan. If support for development, maintenance, or enhancement of software is requested in the application, the reviewers will comment on the proposed software dissemination plan.
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 the NIDCR, 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:
Appeals of initial peer review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this FOA.
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 FOA. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the National Advisory Dental & Craniofacial Research Council. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI
will be able to access his or her 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.
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.
A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via email to the grantee’s business official.
Awardees must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.5. Funding Restrictions. Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs.
Any application awarded in response to this FOA will be subject to terms and conditions found on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website. This includes any recent legislation and policy applicable to awards that is highlighted on this website.
All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities. More information is provided at Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants.
Recipients of federal financial assistance (FFA) from HHS must administer their programs in compliance with federal civil rights law. This means that recipients of HHS funds must ensure equal access to their programs without regard to a person’s race, color, national origin, disability, age and, in some circumstances, sex and religion. This includes ensuring your programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency. HHS recognizes that research projects are often limited in scope for many reasons that are nondiscriminatory, such as the principal investigator’s scientific interest, funding limitations, recruitment requirements, and other considerations. Thus, criteria in research protocols that target or exclude certain populations are warranted where nondiscriminatory justifications establish that such criteria are appropriate with respect to the health or safety of the subjects, the scientific study design, or the purpose of the research.
For additional guidance regarding how the provisions apply to NIH grant programs, please contact the Scientific/Research Contact that is identified in Section VII under Agency Contacts of this FOA. HHS provides general guidance to recipients of FFA on meeting their legal obligation to take reasonable steps to provide meaningful access to their programs by persons with limited English proficiency. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/special-topics/limited-english-proficiency/index.html. The HHS Office for Civil Rights also provides guidance on complying with civil rights laws enforced by HHS. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/section-1557/index.html; and https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-providers/laws-regulations-guidance/index.html. Recipients of FFA also have specific legal obligations for serving qualified individuals with disabilities. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/disability/index.html. Please contact the HHS Office for Civil Rights for more information about obligations and prohibitions under federal civil rights laws at https://www.hhs.gov/ocr/about-us/contact-us/index.html or call 1-800-368-1019 or TDD 1-800-537-7697. Also note it is an HHS Departmental goal to ensure access to quality, culturally competent care, including long-term services and supports, for vulnerable populations. For further guidance on providing culturally and linguistically appropriate services, recipients should review the National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health and Health Care at http://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=2&lvlid=53.
In accordance with the statutory provisions contained in Section 872 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), NIH awards will be subject to the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) requirements. FAPIIS requires Federal award making officials to review and consider information about an applicant in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS) prior to making an award. An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through FAPIIS and comment on any information about itself that a Federal agency previously entered and is currently in FAPIIS. The Federal awarding agency will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to other information in FAPIIS, in making a judgement about the applicant’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 45 CFR Part 75.205 “Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants.” This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.
Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award
The following special terms of award are in addition to, and
not in lieu of, otherwise applicable U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
administrative guidelines, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)
grant administration regulations at 45 CFR Part 75, and other HHS, PHS, and NIH
grant administration policies.
The administrative and funding instrument used for this program will be the cooperative agreement, an "assistance" mechanism (rather than an "acquisition" mechanism), in which substantial NIH programmatic involvement with the awardees is anticipated during the performance of the activities. Under the cooperative agreement, the NIH purpose is to support and stimulate the recipients' activities by involvement in and otherwise working jointly with the award recipients in a partnership role; it is not to assume direction, prime responsibility, or a dominant role in the activities. Consistent with this concept, the dominant role and prime responsibility resides with the awardees for the project as a whole, although specific tasks and activities may be shared among the awardees and the NIH as defined below.
The PD(s)/PI(s) will have the primary responsibility for:
Add any additional bullets by typing in front of the existing bullet, above.
NIH staff have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below:
An NIDCR Project Collaborator will be substantially involved in this project above and beyond the normal stewardship of an NIDCR Program Official by providing technical assistance, advice, and other program actions supporting the conduct of the program. However, the role of the Program Collaborator will be to facilitate, but not to direct the program activities.
The Program Collaborator's responsibilities are described as follows:
Areas of Joint Responsibility include:
Any disagreements that may arise in scientific or programmatic matters (within the scope of the award) between award recipients and the NIH may be brought to Dispute Resolution. A Dispute Resolution Panel composed of three members will be convened. It will have three members: a designee of the Steering Committee chosen without NIH staff voting, one NIH designee, and a third designee with expertise in the relevant area who is chosen by the other two; in the case of individual disagreement, the first member may be chosen by the individual awardee. This special dispute resolution procedure does not alter the awardee's right to appeal an adverse action that is otherwise appealable in accordance with PHS regulation 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D and DHHS regulation 45 CFR Part 16.
When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually. Continuation support will not be provided until the required forms are submitted and accepted. Programs that involve participants should report on education in the responsible conduct of research and complete a Training Diversity Report, in accordance with the RPPR Instruction Guide.
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Transparency Act), includes a requirement for awardees of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later. All awardees of applicable NIH grants and cooperative agreements are required to report to the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at www.fsrs.gov on all subawards over $25,000. See the NIH Grants Policy Statement for additional information on this reporting requirement.
Failure by the grantee institution to submit required forms in a timely, complete, and accurate manner may result in an expenditure disallowance or a delay in any continuation funding for the award.
In accordance with the regulatory requirements provided at 45 CFR 75.113 and Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75, recipients that have currently active Federal grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from all Federal awarding agencies with a cumulative total value greater than $10,000,000 for any period of time during the period of performance of a Federal award, must report and maintain the currency of information reported in the System for Award Management (SAM) about civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings in connection with the award or performance of a Federal award that reached final disposition within the most recent five-year period. The recipient must also make semiannual disclosures regarding such proceedings. Proceedings information will be made publicly available in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS). This is a statutory requirement under section 872 of Public Law 110-417, as amended (41 U.S.C. 2313). As required by section 3010 of Public Law 111-212, all information posted in the designated integrity and performance system on or after April 15, 2011, except past performance reviews required for Federal procurement contracts, will be publicly available. Full reporting requirements and procedures are found in Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75 – Award Term and Conditions for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.
Provide a PDF that includes the following items for each particpant selected for participation in the mentoring network in each budget period over the duration of the project period (the list will be cumulative over time):
A final RPPR 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.
In carrying out its stewardship of human resource-related programs, the NIH or its Institutes and Centers will periodically evaluate their R25 research education programs, employing the measures identified below. In assessing the effectiveness of its research education investments, NIH may request information from databases, PD/PIs, and from participants themselves. Where necessary, PD/PIs and participants may be contacted after the completion of a research education experience for periodic updates on participants’ subsequent educational or employment history and professional activities.
Upon the completion of a program evaluation, NIH and its ICs will determine whether to (a) continue a program as currently configured, (b) continue a program with modifications, or (c) discontinue a program.
In evaluating this research education program NIDCR expects to use the following evaluation measures:
For Courses for Skills Development:
For Research Experience and Mentoring Programs Involving the Following Groups:
Postdoctorates and Early Career Investigators:
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
eRA Service Desk (Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, and post-submission issues)
Finding Help Online: http://grants.nih.gov/support/ (preferred
method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
General Grants Information
(Questions regarding application instructions, application processes, and NIH
Email: GrantsInfo@nih.gov (preferred method of contact)
Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding
Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Lynn Mertens King, Ph.D.
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)
Yasaman Shirazi, Ph.D.
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)
Diana Rutberg, M.B.A.
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)
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.
Awards are made 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 45 CFR Part 75.
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.