EXPIRED
Department of Health and Human Services
Participating Organizations
National Institutes of
Health (NIH) (http://www.nih.gov/)
Components of Participating Organizations
National Institute of
Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) (http://www2.niddk.nih.gov/)
Title: Limited Competition: Clinical Centers for the Halt-Polycystic Kidney Disease Trials
(U01)
Announcement Type
This is a reissue of RFA-DK-01-029 which was previously released May 29, 2001.
Update: The following update relating to this announcement has been issued:
Key Dates
Release Date: November 26, 2007
Letters of Intent Receipt
Date: February 19, 2008
Application
Receipt Date: March
18, 2008
Peer
Review Date(s): July-August
2008
Council Review Date: October 2008
Earliest Anticipated
Start Date: February
1, 2009
Additional
Information To Be Available Date (Url Activation Date): Not applicable
Expiration Date: March 19, 2008
Due Dates for E.O. 12372
Not Applicable
Additional Overview
Content
Executive Summary
Table of Contents
Part I
Overview Information
Part II Full Text of Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity
Description
1. Research Objectives
Section II. Award Information
1. Mechanism(s) of Support
2. Funds Available
Section III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants
A. Eligible Institutions
B. Eligible Individuals
2.Cost Sharing or Matching
3. Other - Special Eligibility Criteria
Section IV. Application and Submission
Information
1. Address to Request Application
Information
2. Content and Form of Application
Submission
3. Submission Dates and Times
A. Receipt and Review and
Anticipated Start Dates
1. Letter of
Intent
B. Sending an Application to
the NIH
C. Application Processing
4. Intergovernmental Review
5. Funding Restrictions
6. Other Submission Requirements
Section V. Application Review
Information
1. Criteria
2. Review and Selection Process
A. Additional Review Criteria
B. Additional Review
Considerations
C. Sharing Research Data
D. Sharing Research Resources
3. Anticipated Announcement and Award
Dates
Section VI. Award Administration
Information
1. Award Notices
2. Administrative and National Policy
Requirements
A. Cooperative Agreement Terms
and Conditions of Award
1. Principal
Investigator Rights and Responsibilities
2. NIH
Responsibilities
3. Collaborative
Responsibilities
4. Arbitration
Process
3. Reporting
Section VII. Agency Contact(s)
1. Scientific/Research Contact(s)
2. Peer Review Contact(s)
3. Financial/ Grants Management Contact(s)
Section VIII. Other Information
- Required Federal Citations
Part II
- Full Text of Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
1. Research Objectives
NIDDK has a longstanding interest in supporting both basic and clinical studies of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD), and issued an RFA in 2001 to support clinical trials of ADPKD. From that RFA, in 2002 five cooperative agreements were awarded to four participating clinical centers (PCC) and one data coordinating center (DCC), to form a HALT-PKD Consortium, which designed the HALT-PKD clinical trials (http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00283686?order=200). The HALT-PKD Consortium is governed by a Steering Committee comprised of PCC and DCC Principal Investigators (PI), a Steering Committee Chair and an NIDDK Project Scientist.
The HALT-PKD Trials are investigating the efficacy of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockade in altering progression of kidney disease in patients with ADPKD. Although a wealth of evidence from several well-designed and rigorous studies shows RAAS blockade with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I ) to be of benefit in slowing renal progression in diabetic kidney disease, a definitive study demonstrating efficacy of RAAS blockade, with (ACE-I) and/or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), on renal progression in ADPKD has not been performed. ACE-I block conversion of angiotensin I (ANG I) to angiotensin II (ANG II) and these drugs are commonly used for the treatment of hypertension in the general population and in ADPKD patients. Systemic ANG II levels do not suppress completely with chronic ACE-I therapy alone, however, and both systemic and renal hemodynamic responses to exogenous ANG I and ANG II infusions persist in the presence of ACE-I. Studies have shown further suppression of ANG II and aldosterone when ARB therapy is added to maximal ACE-I therapy. This may be particularly relevant in ADPKD, as studies of PKD tissue extracts demonstrate exuberant interstitial inflammation with mast cells with chymase-like activity. Reports indicate significantly greater ANG II production despite ACE-I blockade in PKD tissues as compared with non-PKD controls. As ANG II levels and action are important in regulating blood pressure and renal plasma flow and in promoting cyst growth in ADPKD, the HALT-PKD trials were designed to test whether combination therapy with ACE-I and ARB can maximally block ANG II production and action, and alter progression of disease.
The HALT-PKD Trials consist of two multicenter randomized clinical trials that are testing intensive RAAS blockade using ACE-I/ARB combination versus ACE-I monotherapy and targeting different levels of kidney function: (Study A) early disease defined by GFR >60 mL/min/1.73 m2, and (Study B) moderately advanced disease defined by GFR 30-60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Both Studies have a two-year enrollment phase, which began in early 2006. It is anticipated that the patient follow-up phase of the Studies will end by late 2012, and will be followed by a 6-month study close-out period. Participants enrolled in Study A will be followed for a total of four years, while those enrolled in Study B will be followed for four-to-six years, with the average length of follow-up being five years. There are currently seven patient enrolling sites for HALT-PKD, including Emory University, the Mayo Clinic, Kansas University, the Cleveland Clinic Foundation, University of Colorado, Tufts University and Beth Israel Medical Center.
In Study A, the effect of study medication on structural progression at two different levels of blood pressure control is assessed using a 2x2 factorial design. Accordingly, 548 hypertensive ADPKD participants are randomized to one of four study arms: 1) combination ACE-I/ARB with standard blood pressure (BP) control (systolic 120-130 and diastolic 70-80 mm Hg); 2) ACE-I monotherapy with standard BP control; 3) combination ACEI/ ARB treated to a low BP target (systolic 95-110 and diastolic 60-75 mm Hg); and 4) ACE-I treated to the low BP goal. Other antihypertensive agents are added as needed to meet the BP goals. The primary outcome of Study A is the percent change in total kidney volume measured by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Secondary outcome measures include: i) rate of change of GFR; ii) rate of change in renal blood flow; iii) change in left ventricular mass by MRI; iv) rate of change in albuminuria; v) rate of change in 24-hour urine aldosterone excretion; vi) all-cause hospitalizations; vii) hospitalizations due to cardiovascular cause; viii) the frequency of PKD related symptoms or medical conditions (e.g., ruptured renal cyst) ix) quality of life and pain measured using the SF-36v2 and HALT-PKD Pain Questionnaire; and x) adverse effects of medications.
Study B compares ACE-I/ARB combination therapy to ACE-I monotherapy on the time to a 50% reduction of baseline estimated GFR, ESRD or death. All 472 hypertensive ADPKD participants are treated to a standard level of blood pressure control (systolic 110-130 mm Hg and diastolic 80 mm Hg), with addition of other antihypertensive agents as needed. Secondary outcome measures include: i) rate of change in albuminuria; ii) rate of change in 24-hour excretion of aldosterone; iii) all-cause hospitalizations; iv) hospitalizations due to cardiovascular cause; v) the frequency of PKD related symptoms or medical conditions (e.g., ruptured renal cyst); vi) quality of life and pain measured using the SF-36v2 and HALT-PKD Pain Questionnaire; and vii) adverse effects of medications.
The original HALT-PKD awardees, DCC and Clinical Centers, were initially funded for seven years. Due to considerable administrative delays in initiating the HALT-PKD Trials, the DCC and the Clinical Centers must be recompeted to finish the studies. The DCC is being recompeted separately as RFA-DK-07-008 (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-DK-07-008.html ). The primary objective of this HALT-PKD RFA is to provide for continued Clinical Center support so that the HALT-PKD Trials can be successfully completed as planned. The HALT-PKD Clinical Centers have enrolled all of the patient subjects into the HALT-PKD Trials and it is anticipated that these Centers will continue patient follow-up as outlined in the approved HALT-PKD protocols, and complete data collection for the studies.
The HALT-PKD Steering Committee will continue to serve as the governing board for the Consortium; its actions and decisions will be determined by majority vote. Membership on the Steering Committee will include a Steering Committee Chair, the Clinical Center and DCC Principal Investigators and an NIDDK Project Scientist. The responsibilities of the Steering Committee include: Providing input on and approval of all studies developed by the Consortium members prior to study implementation; Reviewing and approval of all data analyses, public presentations and publications of research conducted within the consortium; Developing policies and procedures for submission and approval of research proposals using Consortium resources.
This Limited Competition RFA is not intended to support the HALT-PKD DCC.
See Section VIII, Other Information - Required Federal
Citations, for policies related to this announcement.
Section
II. Award Information
1. Mechanism(s) of Support
This funding
opportunity will use the Cooperative Agreement U01 award mechanism(s).
As an applicant, you
will be solely responsible for planning, directing, and executing the proposed
project.
This funding opportunity
uses the just-in-time budget concepts. It also uses the non-modular budget
format described in the PHS 398 application instructions (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html).
A detailed categorical budget for the "Initial Budget Period" and the
"Entire Proposed Period of Support" is to be submitted with the
application.
The NIH U01 is a cooperative agreement
award mechanism. In the cooperative agreement mechanism, the Principal
Investigator retains the primary responsibility and dominant role for planning,
directing, and executing the proposed project, with NIH staff being
substantially involved as a partner with the Principal Investigator, as described
under the Section VI. 2. Administrative Requirements,
"Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award".
2. Funds Available
NIDDK intends to commit approximately $3,250,000 dollars in FY 2009 to fund The Clinical Centers for HALT-PKD Trials in response to this RFA. An applicant may request a project period of up to 5 years and a budget for direct costs up to $775,000 in the first year.
Because the nature and scope of the proposed research will vary from application to application, it is anticipated that the size and duration of each award will also vary. Although the financial plans of the IC(s) provide support for this program, awards pursuant to this funding opportunity are contingent upon the availability of funds and the receipt of a sufficient number of meritorious applications
Facilities and
administrative costs requested by consortium participants are not included in
the direct cost limitation, see NOT-OD-05-004.
Section
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants
1.A. Eligible Institutions
You may submit (an)
application(s) if your organization has any of the following characteristics:
This FOA is a limited competition for continuation of HALT-PKD trial and related research studies, which was previously reviewed in response to RFA-DK-01-029. Any application awarded as part of that initiative is eligible to apply for continuation. Only those applications deemed exceptional will be considered for funding.
1.B.
Eligible Individuals
Any eligible
individual with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the
proposed research is invited to work with the eligible institutions to develop
an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic
groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply
for NIH support.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching
Not Applicable
The most current Grants
Policy Statement can be found at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/nihgps_Part2.htm#matching_or_cost_sharing
3. Other-Special Eligibility Criteria
None
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Address to Request
Application Information
The PHS 398 application instructions are available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html in an interactive format. Applicants must use the currently approved version of
the PHS 398. For further assistance contact GrantsInfo, Telephone (301)
710-0267, Email: [email protected].
Telecommunications for the hearing impaired: TTY
301-451-5936.
2. Content and Form of
Application Submission
Applications must be prepared using the most current
PHS 398 research grant application instructions and forms. Applications must
have a D&B Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number as the universal
identifier when applying for Federal grants or cooperative agreements. The
D&B number can be obtained by calling (866) 705-5711 or through the web
site at http://www.dnb.com/us/. The
D&B number should be entered on line 11 of the face page of the PHS 398
form.
The title and number of this funding opportunity must
be typed on line 2 of the face page of the application form and the YES box
must be checked.
Foreign Organizations
NIH policies concerning grants to foreign
(non-U.S.) organizations can be found in the NIH Grants Policy Statement at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part12.htm#_Toc54600260.
Applications from foreign organizations must:
Proposed research should provide special opportunities for furthering research programs through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental conditions in other countries that are not readily available in the United States or that augment existing U.S. resources.
3. Submission Dates and Times
Applications must be
received on or before the receipt date described below (Section
IV.3.A). Submission times N/A.
3.A.
Receipt, Review and Anticipated Start Dates
Letters of Intent
Receipt Date: February 19, 2008
Application
Receipt Date: March
18, 2008
Peer
Review Date(s): July-August
2008.
Council Review Date: October 2008
Earliest Anticipated
Start Date: February
1, 2009
3.A.1. Letter of Intent
Prospective applicants
are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:
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.
The letter of intent is to be sent by the date listed
at the beginning of this document.
The letter of intent
should be sent to:
Dr.
Francisco Calvo
Chief, Review Branch
National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Diseases
National Institutes of Health
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 752
Bethesda, MD 20892-5452
Bethesda, MD 20817 (express/courier service)
Telephone: (301) 594-8897
FAX: (301) 480-3505
Email: [email protected]
3.B. Sending an Application to the NIH
Applications must be
prepared using the research grant applications found in the PHS 398
instructions for preparing a research grant application. Submit a signed,
typewritten original of the application, including the checklist, and three signed photocopies in one
package to:
Center for Scientific Review
National Institutes of Health
6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 1040, MSC 7710
Bethesda, MD 20892-7710 (U.S. Postal Service Express
or regular mail)
Bethesda, MD 20817 (for express/courier service;
non-USPS service)
Personal deliveries of
applications are no longer permitted (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-040.html).
At the time of
submission, two additional copies of the application and all copies of the
appendix material must be sent to:
Dr.
Francisco Calvo
Chief, Review Branch
National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Diseases
National Institutes of Health
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 752
Bethesda, MD 20892-5452
Bethesda, MD 20817 (express/courier service)
Telephone: (301) 594-8897
FAX: (301) 480-3505
Email: [email protected]
Using the RFA Label: The RFA label available in
the PHS 398 application instructions must be affixed to the bottom of the face
page of the application. Type the RFA number on the label. 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 2 of the face page of the application form and
the YES box must be marked. The RFA label is also available at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/labels.pdf.
3.C. Application
Processing
Applications must be received on or before the
application receipt date(s) described above (Section IV.3.A.).
If an application is received after that date, it will be returned to the
applicant without review. Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for
completeness by the CSR and responsiveness by the NIDDK. Incomplete and non-responsive
applications will not be reviewed.
If the application is not responsive to the RFA, NIH
staff may contact the applicant to determine whether to return the application
to the applicant or submit it for review in competition with unsolicited
applications at the next appropriate NIH review cycle.
The NIH will not accept
any application in response to this funding opportunity that is essentially the
same as one currently pending initial review, unless the applicant withdraws
the pending application. However, when a previously unfunded application,
originally submitted as an investigator-initiated application, is to be
submitted in response to a funding opportunity, it is to be prepared as a NEW
application. That is, the application for the funding opportunity must not
include an Introduction describing the changes and improvements made, and the
text must not be marked to indicate the changes from the previous unfunded
version of the application.
Information on the status of an application should be
checked by the Principal Investigator in the eRA Commons at: https://commons.era.nih.gov/commons/.
4. Intergovernmental Review
This initiative is not
subject to intergovernmental
review.
5. Funding Restrictions
All NIH awards are
subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations
described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. The Grants Policy Statement can
be found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/policy.htm.
Pre-award costs are
allowable. A grantee may, at its own risk and without NIH prior approval, incur
obligations and expenditures to cover costs up to 90 days before the beginning
date of the initial budget period of a new or competing continuation award if
such costs: are necessary to conduct the project, and would be allowable under
the grant, if awarded, without NIH prior approval. If specific expenditures
would otherwise require prior approval, the grantee must obtain NIH approval
before incurring the cost. NIH prior approval is required for any costs to be
incurred more than 90 days before the beginning date of the initial budget
period of a new or competing continuation award.
The incurrence of pre-award costs in anticipation of a
competing or non-competing award imposes no obligation on NIH either to make
the award or to increase the amount of the approved budget if an award is made
for less than the amount anticipated and is inadequate to cover the pre-award
costs incurred. NIH expects the grantee to be fully aware that pre-award costs
result in borrowing against future support and that such borrowing must not
impair the grantee's ability to accomplish the project objectives in the
approved time frame or in any way adversely affect the conduct of the project.
See NIH Grants Policy Statement http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part6.htm.
6. Other Submission Requirements
Plan for Sharing Research
Data
The precise content of
the data-sharing plan will vary, depending on the data being collected and how
the investigator is planning to share the data. Applicants who are planning to
share data may wish to describe briefly the expected schedule for data sharing,
the format of the final dataset, the documentation to be provided, whether or
not any analytic tools also will be provided, whether or not a data-sharing
agreement will be required and, if so, a brief description of such an agreement
(including the criteria for deciding who can receive the data and whether or
not any conditions will be placed on their use), and the mode of data sharing
(e.g., under their own auspices by mailing a disk or posting data on their
institutional or personal website, through a data archive or enclave).
Investigators choosing to share under their own auspices may wish to enter into
a data-sharing agreement. References to data sharing may also be appropriate in
other sections of the application.
Applicants
requesting more than $500,000 in direct costs in any year of the proposed
research must include a plan for sharing research data in their application.
The funding organization will be responsible for monitoring the data sharing
policy (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing).
The reasonableness of the data sharing plan or the
rationale for not sharing research data may be assessed by the reviewers.
However, reviewers will not factor the proposed data sharing plan into the
determination of scientific merit or the priority score.
All applicants must
include a plan for sharing research data in their application. The data sharing
policy is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing.
All investigators responding to this funding opportunity should include a
description of how final research data will be shared, or explain why data
sharing is not possible.
The reasonableness of
the data sharing plan or the rationale for not sharing research data will be
assessed by the reviewers. However, reviewers will not factor the proposed data
sharing plan into the determination of scientific merit or the priority score.
Sharing Research Resources
NIH policy expects that
grant recipients make unique research resources readily available for research
purposes to qualified individuals within the scientific community after
publication (NIH Grants Policy Statement http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/index.htm and http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part7.htm#_Toc54600131).
Investigators responding to this funding opportunity should include a plan for
sharing research resources addressing how unique research resources will be
shared or explain why sharing is not possible.
The adequacy of the resources sharing plan and any
related data sharing plans will be considered by Program staff of the funding
organization when making recommendations about funding applications. The
effectiveness of the resource sharing will be evaluated as part of the
administrative review of each non-competing Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590, http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/2590/2590.htm).
See Section VI.3. Reporting.
Section
V. Application Review Information
1. Criteria
Only the review
criteria described below will be considered in the review process.
The following will
be considered in making funding decisions:
2. Review and Selection Process
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 NIDDK in accordance with the review
criteria stated below.
As part of the initial
merit review, all applications will:
The
goals of NIH supported research are to advance our understanding of biological
systems, to improve the control of disease, and to enhance health. In their
written critiques, reviewers will be asked to comment on each of the following
criteria in order to judge the likelihood that the proposed research will have
a substantial impact on the pursuit of these goals. Each of these criteria will
be addressed and considered in assigning the overall score, weighting them as
appropriate for each application. Note that an application does not need to be
strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact
and thus deserve a high priority score. For example, an investigator may
propose to carry out important work that by its nature is not innovative but is
essential to move a field forward.
Significance: Does this study address an
important problem? If the aims of the application are achieved, how will
scientific knowledge or clinical practice be advanced? What will be the effect
of these studies on the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services,
or preventative interventions that drive this field?
Approach: Are the conceptual or
clinical framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well
integrated, well reasoned, and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the
applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics? Has
recruitment and retention in the previous funding cycle been adequate?
Innovation: Is the project original and
innovative? For example: Does the project challenge existing paradigms or
clinical practice; address an innovative hypothesis or critical barrier to
progress in the field? Does the project develop or employ novel concepts,
approaches, methodologies, tools, or technologies for this area?
Investigators: Are the investigators
appropriately trained and well suited to carry out this work? Is the work
proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal investigator and
other researchers? Does the investigative team bring complementary and
integrated expertise to the project (if applicable)?
Environment: Does the scientific
environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of
success? Do the proposed studies benefit from unique features of the scientific
environment, or subject populations, or employ useful collaborative arrangements?
Is there evidence of institutional support?
2.A. Additional Review
Criteria:
In addition to the
above criteria, the following items will continue to be considered in the
determination of scientific merit and the priority score:
Protection
of Human Subjects from Research Risk: The involvement of human subjects and protections from
research risk relating to their participation in the proposed research will be
assessed (see the Research Plan, Section E on Human Subjects in the PHS Form
398).
Inclusion
of Women, Minorities and Children in Research: The adequacy of plans to
include subjects from both genders, all racial and ethnic groups (and
subgroups), and children as appropriate for the scientific goals of the
research will be assessed. Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects
will also be evaluated (see the Research Plan, Section E on Human Subjects in
the PHS Form 398).
Care and
Use of Vertebrate Animals in Research: If vertebrate animals are to
be used in the project, the five items described under Section F of the PHS
Form 398 research grant application instructions will be assessed.
Biohazards: If materials or procedures
are proposed that are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the
environment, determine if the proposed protection is adequate.
2.B. Additional Review
Considerations
Budget: The reasonableness of the
proposed budget and the requested period of support in relation to the proposed
research. The priority score should not be affected by the evaluation of the
budget.
2.C. Sharing Research Data
Data Sharing Plan: The reasonableness of the
data sharing plan or the rationale for not sharing research data will be
assessed by the reviewers. However, reviewers will not factor the proposed data
sharing plan into the determination of scientific merit or the priority score.
The presence of a data sharing plan will be part of the terms and conditions of
the award. The funding organization will be responsible for monitoring the data
sharing policy.
2.D. Sharing Research
Resources
NIH policy expects that
grant recipients make unique research resources readily available for research
purposes to qualified individuals within the scientific community after
publication (See the NIH Grants Policy Statement http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps/part_ii_5.htm#availofrr and http://www.ott.nih.gov/policy/rt_guide_final.html). Investigators responding to
this funding opportunity should include a sharing research resources plan
addressing how unique research resources will be shared or explain why sharing
is not possible.
Program staff will be
responsible for the administrative review of the plan for sharing research
resources.
The adequacy of the
resources sharing plan will be considered by Program staff of the funding
organization when making recommendations about funding applications. Program
staff may negotiate modifications of the data and resource sharing plans with
the awardee before recommending funding of an application. The final version of
the data and resource sharing plans negotiated by both will become a condition
of the award of the grant. The effectiveness of the resource sharing will be
evaluated as part of the administrative review of each non-competing Grant
Progress Report (PHS 2590). See Section VI.3. Reporting.
3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates
Not Applicable.
Section
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices
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.
If the application is under consideration for funding,
NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant. For
details, applicants may refer to the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms
and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_part4.htm).
A formal notification in the form of a Notice
of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization. The NoA
signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document. Once all
administrative and programmatic issues have been resolved, the NoA will be
generated via email notification from the awarding component to the grantee
business official (designated in item 12 on the Application Face Page). If a
grantee is not email enabled, a hard copy of the NoA will be mailed to the
business official.
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. See Also Section
IV.5. Funding Restrictions.
2. Administrative and National
Policy Requirements
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 (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part4.htm)
and Part II Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and
Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_part9.htm).
The following Terms and
Conditions will be incorporated into the award statement and will be provided
to the Principal Investigator as well as to the appropriate institutional
official, at the time of award.
2.A. Cooperative Agreement
Terms and Conditions of Award
The following special
terms of award are in addition to, and not in lieu of, otherwise applicable OMB
administrative guidelines, HHS grant administration regulations at 45 CFR Parts
74 and 92 (Part 92 is applicable when State and local Governments are eligible
to apply), and other HHS, PHS, and NIH grant administration policies.
The administrative and funding instrument used for
this program will be the cooperative agreement (U01),
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.
2.A.1. Principal
Investigator Rights and Responsibilities
The PI will have the primary responsibility for defining the
protocols, approaches and details of the project within the guidelines of this
RFA. The PI will be responsible for trial implementation at the site,
including protocol changes, coordination of IRB clearances, oversight of all
sub-contracts, quality control, recruitment and retention of study subjects,
analysis of study results and close-out activities. Each PI will be a
voting member of the Consortium Steering Commitee, will participate in all
Steering Committee activities, and will follow the policies and procedures developed
by the Steering Committee. Each Clinical Center PI will have primary
responsibility for providing study data to the DCC for management, quality
control and analysis. PI responsibility regarding Steering Committee
membership, protocol development and conduct are described under Collaborative
Responsibilities.
The NIDDK has established Central Biosample, Genetic, and
Data Repositories for the archival and storage of data and biosamples collected
in large, multi-site studies funded by NIDDK. The HALT-PKD PIs will work with
the NIDDK Biosamples Repository to coordinate procedures for coding, shipping,
processing, receipt, and storage of study samples that are to be maintained in
the Repository. In addition, the DCC will coordinate with the NIDDK Repository
to prepare the collected data for eventual archiving and distribution. All
samples and data transferred to the Repositories will be under the
custodianship of the NIDDK, although the Consortium Steering Committee will
have proprietary control of and exclusive access to the samples and data for an
agreed-upon period of time.
Awardees will retain
custody of and have primary rights to the data and software developed under
these awards, subject to Government rights of access consistent with current HHS,
PHS, and NIH policies.
2.A.2. NIH
Responsibilities
An NIH Project Scientist
will have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the
normal stewardship role in awards, as described below.
The NIDDK Project Scientist will serve as a voting member of
the Steering Committee and will participate in all Committee activities,
serving as a resource with respect to the study design and implementation.
The NIDDK Project Scientist, together with the Steering Committee, will review the performance of each participating Center through consideration of the annual reports, sites visits, compliance with the Consortium procedures, meeting timeliness, adherence to uniform data collection procedures, and the timeliness and quality of data reporting. The NIDDK Project Scientist may contribute, through review, comment, analysis, and/or authorship, to reporting results of consortium studies to the investigator community and other interested scientific and lay organizations.
The NIDDK reserves the right to terminate or curtail any
study or any individual award in the event of (a) substantial shortfall in data
collection or submission, quality control, or other major breach or a study
protocol or Consortium policy and procedure, (b) substantive changes in a study
protocol that are not in keeping with the objectives of the RFA, and/or a human
subject ethical issues that may dictate a premature termination.
Additionally, an agency
program official or IC program director will be responsible for the normal
scientific and programmatic stewardship of the award and will be named in the
award notice.
2.A.3.
Collaborative Responsibilities
The Steering committee will be the governing board of the Consortium; its actions and decisions will be determined by majority vote. Voting members of the Steering Committee include a Steering Committee Chair, PCC and the DCC PIs and the NIDDK Project Scientist. A Chair will be chosen from among the Steering Committee member (but not the NIDDK Project Scientist or DCC PI) or alternatively, from among experts in the field of clinical trials in kidney diseases who are not participating directly in the study. The Committee has the primary responsibility for determining the study protocol, monitoring the conduct of the study and reviewing data prior to reporting of study results. It will also be responsible for determining study policies in such areas as access to participant data, ancillary studies, publication and presentations, recruitment and quality standards. Each PI will be responsible for close coordination and cooperation with other Consortium investigators and with NIH staff. The PI will participate in regular (monthly) Steering Committee telephone calls and attend two Steering Committee meetings per year in the Washington DC Metro area.
The NIDDK Project Scientist (and other NIDDK scientists) may
work with awardees on issues coming before the Steering Committee and, as
appropriate, other committees, e.g. issues of recruitment, follow-up, quality
control, standards and methods, adherence to protocol, assessment of problems
affecting the study and potential changes in the protocol, interim data and
safety monitoring, final data analysis and interpretation, preparation of
publications, and development of solutions to major problems such as
insufficient participant participation. Regardless of the number of NIH
staff participating in technical advisory roles, the NIDDK will be limited to
one vote on the Steering Committee.
Each full member will
have one vote. Awardee members of the Steering Committee will be required to
accept and implement policies approved by the Steering Committee.
2.A.4. Arbitration
Process
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 arbitration. An
Arbitration 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
arbitration procedure in no way affects the awardee's right to appeal an
adverse action that is otherwise appealable in accordance with PHS regulations
42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D and HHS regulations 45 CFR Part 16.
3. Reporting
Awardees will be
required to submit the PHS Non-Competing Grant Progress Report, Form 2590
annually (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/2590/2590.htm)
and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Section
VII. Agency Contacts
We
encourage your inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the
opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants. Inquiries may fall
into three areas: scientific/research, peer review, and financial or grants
management issues:
1. Scientific/Research Contacts:
Dr. Catherine M. Meyers
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
National Institutes of Health
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 641
Bethesda, Maryland 20892-5458
Telephone: (301) 594-7717
FAX (301) 480-3510
Email: [email protected]
Dr. Laura Moen
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
National Institutes of Health
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 623
Bethesda, Maryland 20892-5458
Telephone: (301) 594-4748
FAX (301) 480-3510
Email: [email protected]
2. Peer Review Contacts:
Dr.
Francisco Calvo
Chief, Review Branch
National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Diseases
National Institutes of Health
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 752
Bethesda, MD 20892-5452
Bethesda, MD 20817 (express/courier service)
Telephone: (301) 594-8897
FAX: (301) 480-3505
Email: [email protected]
3. Financial or Grants Management Contacts:
Ms. Carey
Beckley
Grants Management Branch
Division of Extramural Activities
National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney
Diseases
National Institutes of Health
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 725
Bethesda, Maryland 20892-5456
Telephone: (301) 594-8833
FAX: (301) 594-9523
E-mail: [email protected]
Section VIII. Other Information
Required Federal Citations
Human Subjects
Protection:
Federal regulations
(45CFR46) require that applications and proposals involving human subjects must
be evaluated with reference to the risks to the subjects, the adequacy of
protection against these risks, the potential benefits of the research to the
subjects and others, and the importance of the knowledge gained or to be gained
(http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm).
Data and Safety
Monitoring Plan:
Data and safety
monitoring is required for all types of clinical trials, including physiologic
toxicity and dose-finding studies (phase I); efficacy studies (Phase II);
efficacy, effectiveness and comparative trials (Phase III). Monitoring should
be commensurate with risk. The establishment of data and safety monitoring
boards (DSMBs) is required for multi-site clinical trials involving
interventions that entail potential risks to the participants (NIH Policy for
Data and Safety Monitoring, NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not98-084.html).
Sharing Research
Data:
Investigators submitting
an NIH application seeking $500,000 or more in direct costs in any single year
are expected to include a plan for data sharing or state why this is not
possible (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing).
Investigators should seek guidance from their
institutions, on issues related to institutional policies and local IRB rules,
as well as local, State and Federal laws and regulations, including the Privacy
Rule. Reviewers will consider the data sharing plan but will not factor the plan
into the determination of the scientific merit or the priority score.
Access to Research
Data through the Freedom of Information Act:
The Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110 has been revised to provide access to research
data through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) under some circumstances.
Data that are (1) first produced in a project that is supported in whole or in
part with Federal funds and (2) cited publicly and officially by a Federal
agency in support of an action that has the force and effect of law (i.e., a
regulation) may be accessed through FOIA. It is important for applicants to
understand the basic scope of this amendment. NIH has provided guidance at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/a110/a110_guidance_dec1999.htm.
Applicants may wish to place data collected under this funding opportunity in a
public archive, which can provide protections for the data and manage the
distribution for an indefinite period of time. If so, the application should
include a description of the archiving plan in the study design and include
information about this in the budget justification section of the application.
In addition, applicants should think about how to structure informed consent
statements and other human subjects procedures given the potential for wider
use of data collected under this award.
Inclusion of Women
And Minorities in Clinical Research:
It is the policy of the
NIH that women and members of minority groups and their sub-populations must be
included in all NIH-supported clinical research projects unless a clear and
compelling justification is provided indicating that inclusion is inappropriate
with respect to the health of the subjects or the purpose of the research. This
policy results from the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 (Section 492B of Public
Law 103-43). All investigators proposing clinical research should read the
"NIH Guidelines for Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in
Clinical Research (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-001.html);
a complete copy of the updated Guidelines is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_amended_10_2001.htm.
The amended policy incorporates: the use of an NIH definition of clinical
research; updated racial and ethnic categories in compliance with the new OMB
standards; clarification of language governing NIH-defined Phase III clinical
trials consistent with the new PHS Form 398; and updated roles and
responsibilities of NIH staff and the extramural community. The policy
continues to require for all NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials that: a) all
applications or proposals and/or protocols must provide a description of plans
to conduct analyses, as appropriate, to address differences by sex/gender
and/or racial/ethnic groups, including subgroups if applicable; and b)
investigators must report annual accrual and progress in conducting analyses,
as appropriate, by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic group differences.
Inclusion of Children
as Participants in Clinical Research:
The NIH maintains a
policy that children (i.e., individuals under the age of 21) must be included
in all clinical research, conducted or supported by the NIH, unless there are
scientific and ethical reasons not to include them.
All investigators proposing research involving human
subjects should read the "NIH Policy and Guidelines" on the inclusion
of children as participants in research involving human subjects (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/children/children.htm).
Required Education on
the Protection of Human Subject Participants:
NIH policy requires
education on the protection of human subject participants for all investigators
submitting NIH applications for research involving human subjects and
individuals designated as key personnel. The policy is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-039.html.
Human Embryonic Stem
Cells (hESC):
Criteria for federal
funding of research on hESCs can be found at http://stemcells.nih.gov/index.asp and at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-005.html.
Only research using hESC lines that are registered in the NIH Human Embryonic
Stem Cell Registry will be eligible for Federal funding (http://escr.nih.gov). It is the responsibility
of the applicant to provide in the project description and elsewhere in the
application as appropriate, the official NIH identifier(s) for the hESC
line(s)to be used in the proposed research. Applications that do not provide
this information will be returned without review.
NIH Public Access
Policy:
NIH-funded investigators
are requested to submit to the NIH manuscript submission (NIHMS) system (http://www.nihms.nih.gov) at PubMed
Central (PMC) an electronic version of the author's final manuscript upon
acceptance for publication, resulting from research supported in whole or in
part with direct costs from NIH. The author's final manuscript is defined as
the final version accepted for journal publication, and includes all
modifications from the publishing peer review process.
NIH is requesting that
authors submit manuscripts resulting from 1) currently funded NIH research
projects or 2) previously supported NIH research projects if they are accepted
for publication on or after May 2, 2005. The NIH Public Access Policy applies
to all research grant and career development award mechanisms, cooperative
agreements, contracts, Institutional and Individual Ruth L. Kirschstein
National Research Service Awards, as well as NIH intramural research studies.
The Policy applies to peer-reviewed, original research publications that have
been supported in whole or in part with direct costs from NIH, but it does not apply
to book chapters, editorials, reviews, or conference proceedings. Publications
resulting from non-NIH-supported research projects should not be submitted.
For more information
about the Policy or the submission process please visit the NIH Public Access
Policy Web site at http://publicaccess.nih.gov/ and
view the Policy or other Resources and Tools including the Authors' Manual (http://publicaccess.nih.gov/publicaccess_Manual.htm).
Standards for Privacy
of Individually Identifiable Health Information:
The Department of Health
and Human Services (DHHS) issued final modification to the "Standards for
Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information", the
"Privacy Rule", on August 14, 2002 . The Privacy Rule is a federal
regulation under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
(HIPAA) of 1996 that governs the protection of individually identifiable health
information, and is administered and enforced by the DHHS Office for Civil
Rights (OCR).
Decisions about applicability and implementation of
the Privacy Rule reside with the researcher and his/her institution. The OCR
website (http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/)
provides information on the Privacy Rule, including a complete Regulation Text
and a set of decision tools on "Am I a covered entity?" Information
on the impact of the HIPAA Privacy Rule on NIH processes involving the review,
funding, and progress monitoring of grants, cooperative agreements, and
research contracts can be found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-025.html.
URLs in NIH Grant
Applications or Appendices:
All applications and proposals
for NIH funding must be self-contained within specified page limitations. For
publications listed in the appendix and/or Progress report, internet addresses
(URLs) must be used for publicly accessible on-line journal
articles. Unless otherwise specified in this solicitation,
Internet addresses (URLs) should not be used to provide any other information necessary for the review because reviewers are under no obligation
to view the Internet sites. Furthermore, we caution reviewers that their
anonymity may be compromised when they directly access an Internet site.
Healthy People 2010:
The Public Health
Service (PHS) is committed to achieving the health promotion and disease
prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2010," a PHS-led national
activity for setting priority areas. This RFA is related to one or more of the
priority areas. Potential applicants may obtain a copy of "Healthy People
2010" at http://www.health.gov/healthypeople.
Authority and
Regulations: This program is described
in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance at http://www.cfda.gov/ and is
not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order
12372 or Health Systems Agency review. 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 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92.
All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other
considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. The NIH Grants Policy Statement can be found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/policy.htm.
The PHS strongly
encourages all grant recipients to provide a smoke-free workplace and
discourage the use of all tobacco products. In addition, Public Law 103-227,
the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking in certain facilities (or in
some cases, any portion of a facility) in which regular or routine education,
library, day care, health care, or early childhood development services are provided
to children. This is consistent with the PHS mission to protect and advance the
physical and mental health of the American people.
Loan Repayment
Programs:
NIH encourages
applications for educational loan repayment from qualified health professionals
who have made a commitment to pursue a research career involving clinical,
pediatric, contraception, infertility, and health disparities related areas.
The LRP is an important component of NIH's efforts to recruit and retain the
next generation of researchers by providing the means for developing a research
career unfettered by the burden of student loan debt. Note that an NIH grant is
not required for eligibility and concurrent career award and LRP applications
are encouraged. The periods of career award and LRP award may overlap providing
the LRP recipient with the required commitment of time and effort, as LRP
awardees must commit at least 50% of their time (at least 20 hours per week
based on a 40 hour week) for two years to the research. For further information,
please see: http://www.lrp.nih.gov.
Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices
| ||||||
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) |
||||||
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health® |