and Human Services (HHS)
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://www.niddk.nih.gov)
Title: Announcement of a Limited Competition for the Continuation of the Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery (LABS) (U01)
Announcement Type
This is a modified reissue of RFA-DK-03-006.
Request For Applications (RFA) Number: RFA-DK-08-501
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number(s)
93.848
Key Dates
Release Date: March 13, 2008
Letters of
Intent Receipt Date: October
16, 2008
Application Receipt Date: November 13, 2008
Peer
Review Date(s): January –
February 2009
Council Review
Date: May 2009
Earliest
Anticipated Start Date: July 2009
Additional Information To Be Available Date (Url
Activation Date): Not Applicable
Expiration
Date: November 14, 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, Review and
Anticipated Start Dates
1.
Letter of Intent
B. Sending an Application to
the NIH
C. Application Processing
D. Application Assignment
4. Intergovernmental Review
5. Funding Restrictions
6. Other Submission Requirements and Information
Section V. Application Review
Information
1. Criteria
2. Review and Selection Process
A. Additional Review Criteria
B. Additional Review
Considerations
C. Resource Sharing Plan(s)
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
This FOA
is soliciting applications from principal investigators currently supported
under RFA-DK-03-006,
Bariatric Surgery Clinical Research Consortium (renamed the Longitudinal
Assessment of Bariatric Surgery (LABS)), to continue their longitudinal
assessment of subjects who undergo bariatric surgery. This is a one-time
solicitation to support the LABS consortium for a maximum of five years,
contingent on satisfactory study recruitment and retention.
NIDDK has supported the LABS Consortium since September of 2003. The LABS Consortium has completed a study of the 30 day outcomes of approximately 5,000 bariatric surgery patients and has recruited over 1,500 patients who are willing to be followed longitudinally to assess the longer-term safety and efficiency of bariatric surgery. A mechanistic study of diabetes before and after bariatric surgery and psychosocial studies in a subset of this population are also being carried out.
NIDDK is soliciting renewal applications from existing Clinical Centers (CC) and the existing Data Coordinating Center (DCC) to continue the efforts of the LABS consortium to longitudinally follow patients after bariatric surgery.
ORGANIZATION OF THE LONGITUDINAL ASSESSMENT OF BARIATRIC SURGERY (LABS) CONSORTIUM
The LABS Consortium will consist of the following components: the NIH, up to six CCs, a DCC, a Steering Committee and its subcommittees, a Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB), and other committees as needed. The responsibilities of each component of the LABS Consortium are described in the Terms and Conditions of Award.
The NIDDK will be responsible for organizing and providing support for the LABS Consortium and will be involved substantially with the awardees as a "partner", consistent with the Cooperative Agreement mechanism. A designated NIDDK Project Scientist, who will assist the Steering Committee in carrying out the study. The NIDDK will appoint the Chairperson(s) of the Steering Committee and all members of the DSMB.
Clinical Centers. The CC will continue to recruit subjects into the approved LABS studies and will conduct the longitudinal follow-up as described in the study protocols. All individual CCs will be required to participate in a cooperative and interactive manner with one another and with the DCC in all aspects of the LABS Consortium (see Terms and Conditions of Award). Only investigators who wish to continue to carry out the protocols of the LABS consortium and agree to be governed by the policies of the LABS consortium and its steering committee should apply under this FOA.
Data Coordinating Center. The DCC will continue to support the LABS consortium as outlined in RFA DK-03-006. This includes supporting any protocol development or modifications; providing sample size calculations, statistical advice, questionnaires, and data analysis; supporting development, implementation, and maintenance of a data base of clinical information and blood samples; developing or modifying any data safety and monitoring plans; supporting manuscript preparation; and providing overall study coordination and quality assurance, including coordination of the activities and meetings (including conference calls) of the Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB), the Steering Committee, and other needed committees. The DCC will prepare or modify protocols for submission to the DSMB and the Steering Committee for their approval prior to the implementation of any study protocols or protocol change. The DCC will also prepare all reports including data reports for review by the DSMB at their meetings. The DCC will also be responsible for the logistics and planning of the meetings of the Steering Committee and the various operational committees of LABS. The Data Coordinating Center will be responsible for acquiring and administering subcontracts as needed. (See Terms and Conditions of Award).
Study Governance
Steering Committee. A Steering Committee will be the main governing body of the LABS Consortium (see Terms and Conditions of Award). An Executive Committee comprised of the Study Chair and Co-Chair, if appropriate; the Principal Investigator of the DCC; and the NIDDK Project Scientist also will be convened to effect management decisions required between Steering Committee meetings, as needed for efficient progress of the trial. Other subcommittees of the Steering Committee will be established and will operate as necessary, such as publications, adjudications and safety.
Data Safety and Monitoring Board. An independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) will be established by the NIDDK to review protocols and monitor patient safety and performance of each study. As a part of its responsibilities, the DSMB will submit recommendations to the NIDDK regarding the continuation of each study. The DSMB will be responsible for final approval of the Data and Safety Monitoring Plan developed by the DCC.
All
protocols or changes to protocols will be approved by local Institutional
Review Boards, the Steering Committee, the LABS Data and Safety Monitoring
Board, and the NIDDK before initiation. Any specific collaboration involving
the resources of LABS will require approval by the Steering Committee.
See Section VIII, Other Information - Required Federal
Citations, for policies related to this announcement.
Section
II. Award Information
1. Mechanism of Support
This funding opportunity will use a cooperative agreement award mechanism. In the cooperative
agreement mechanism, the Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI)
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
The estimated amount of funds available for support of six
clinical centers and one data coordinating center projects
awarded as a result of this announcement is $4,000,000 for
fiscal year 2009. Future year
amounts will depend on annual appropriations.
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.
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made in response to this FOA.
Section III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants
1.A. Eligible Institutions
The following
organizations/institutions are eligible to apply:
1.B. Eligible Individuals
Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the PD/PI is invited to work with his/her organization 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.
Individuals currently serving as a Principal Investigator on a LABS CC or DCC award may work with their organization to apply for support under this RFA, if they are still a part of the Institution that is currently funded as a LABS CC or DCC.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching
This
program does not require cost sharing as defined in the current NIH
Grants Policy Statement.
3. Other-Special Eligibility Criteria
Applicants are not permitted to
submit a resubmission application in response to this FOA.
Renewal applications will be permitted in response to this FOA.
Applicants may submit only one application.
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 lines 1 and 2 of the face
page of the application form and the YES box must be checked.
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
Letter
of Intent Receipt Date: October 16,
2008
Application Receipt Date: November 13, 2008
Peer Review Date: January - February 2009
Council Review Date: May 2009
Earliest
Anticipated Start Date: July 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
in Section IV.3.A.
The letter of intent
should be sent to:
Francisco O. Calvo,
Ph.D.
Chief, Review Branch
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 752
Bethesda, MD 20892-5452
(for express/courier service: Bethesda, MD 20817)
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 forms 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:
Francisco O. Calvo,
Ph.D.
Chief, Review Branch
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 752
Bethesda, MD 20892-5452
(for express/courier service: Bethesda, MD 20817)
Telephone: (301) 594-8897
FAX: (301) 480-3505
Email: [email protected]
3.C. Application
Processing
Applications must be received on or before the
application receipt date) described above (Section
IV.3.A.). If an application is received after that date, the application
may be delayed in the review process or not reviewed. Upon receipt, applications
will be evaluated for completeness by the CSR and for responsiveness by the
reviewing Institute Incomplete and/or non-responsive applications will not be
reviewed.
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 NIH Grants
Policy Statement.
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 renewal award if such costs: 1) are
necessary to conduct the project, and 2) 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 renewal 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 and Information
Applicants for CCs should describe their accomplishments related to participation in previous collaborative projects within LABS (e.g., recruitment of subjects, committee membership or chairmanship, project leadership, etc.) The CC application must provide detailed plans for future subject recruitment related to the research plan described in the DCC application, if applicable, and indicate the roles which personnel will play in executing this research plan. Each CC submitting an application in response to this FOA must provide evidence of their ability to carry out the protocols already approved by the LABS Steering Committee for each protocol in which their Center has been selected to participate.
Each CC must show how they will be able to submit data to the DCC and blood samples to the NIDDK Repository (supported by an independent contract from NIDDK) and to a Central Laboratory as approved by the LABS Steering Committee. CCs must show how they will work in concert with the DCC to implement procedures for uniform data collection, handling and transmittal of data, as well as data audits and other data quality control procedures, as established by the study protocol. CCs must also provide information regarding past contributions to and future plans for involvement with operational committees of LABS (e.g. Recruitment, Publications, etc.) and the establishment of uniform procedures and policies.
Each CC application must describe their plans for retaining study subjects, so that a longitudinal assessment of bariatric surgery can be accomplished according to the approved protocols. Each application should describe specific barriers to the retention of the patient population at their Center and discuss how they plan to address these barriers.
There should be evidence of strong institutional support for the CC, including adequate space in which to conduct clinical and research activities and office space for staff. Institutional resources for patient care and follow-up including personnel, space, and special laboratory facilities must be described in the CC application.
An organizational structure for the CC should be set forth in the application, delineating lines of authority and responsibility for dealing with problems in all general areas as well as stated willingness to follow commonly agreed upon protocols. The principal investigator and the Institution should indicate his/her willingness to participate in a per patient basis for operational costs of patient specimen acquisition and processing.
Supplemental Instructions for Data Coordinating Center (DCC)
The application for the DCC, should describe the previous research accomplishments of the LABS consortium, as well as its overall prospective research plan, including its operational infrastructure (committees, procedures for coordination and communication, etc). Where appropriate, it should credit the participation of CC members in the previous work of the LABS consortium, and note what roles they are anticipated to play in implementing particular parts of the prospective research plan. It is expected that the PI of the DCC will carry out a significant leadership role in the consortium. The DCC must describe all the protocols that have been approved by the LABS steering committee that will be continued and include the structure of the database of information being collected on all subjects.
The DCC applicant must also address the following regarding responsibilities and requirement for the DCC.
1. Participation in the design of all research studies and the development or updating of the manual of operation, data collection forms, and questionnaires;
2. Development and implementation of systems for communication among Steering Committee members and among study sites;
3. Data collection, editing, processing, analysis and reporting;
4. Monitoring of adherence to the research plan and of data quality;
5. Establishment of procedures that insure the safety and confidentiality of all records.
6. Delineate a plan for coordinating submission of blood samples from the CCs to the NIDDK Repository and to the Central Laboratory.
Other Special Performance Requirements
The LABS Consortium will continue to be a collaborative effort that will require frequent interactions of awardees among themselves and with the NIDDK. Applicants must explicitly indicate their willingness to:
1. Participate in Steering Committee meetings (expected to occur in person approximately 2 times a year, in or near Bethesda, MD and as monthly teleconference, as needed), site visits required by the NIDDK, and regular telephone conference calls,
2. Cooperate with other awardees in the development and design or modification of research protocols, and cooperate with other awardees in carrying out approved research protocols,
3. Abide by common definitions; common methods for patient selection and enrollment; and common protocols, procedures, tests, and reporting forms as chosen by majority vote of the Steering Committee,
4. Actively seek to implement each consortium-wide protocol approved by the DSMB and the NIDDK that the site is selected for participation.
5. Comply with study policies and quality assurance measures approved by the Steering Committee,
6. Agree to oversight of the study by a Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB),
7. Accept awards for the support of research based on per-patient (capitated) rates and the actual numbers of subjects enrolled, followed, and completing the study (Clinical Centers only),
8. Transmit study data to the Data and Coordinating Center in a timely and accurate manner (Clinical Centers only),
9. Report all adverse events in accordance with procedures established by the Steering Committee and NIDDK policies,
10. Cooperate with other awardees in the publication of study results and the eventual release to the scientific community of study procedures and other resources,
11. Accept the “Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award” in Section VI.2.A “Award Administration Information”.
Research Plan Page Limitations
Appendix Materials
All paper PHS 398 applications submitted for May 25, 2008 and subsequent due dates must provide appendix material on CD only, and include five identical CDs in the same package with the application. Paper applications submitted for due dates prior to May 25, 2008 may voluntarily provide the appendix on five identical CDs; if submitting CDs it is not necessary to include a paper appendix. (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-08-031.html.)
Do not use the Appendix to circumvent the page limitations of the Research Plan component. An application that does not observe the required page limitations may be delayed in the review process.
Resource Sharing Plan(s)NIH considers the sharing of unique research resources developed through NIH-sponsored research an important means to enhance the value of, and advance research. When resources have been developed with NIH funds and the associated research findings published or provided to NIH, it is important that they be made readily available for research purposes to qualified individuals within the scientific community. If the final data/resources are not amenable to sharing, this must be explained in Resource Sharing section of the application. See http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing/data_sharing_faqs.htm.
(a) Data Sharing Plan: Regardless of the amount requested, investigators are expected to include a brief 1-paragraph description of how final research data will be shared, or explain why data-sharing is not possible. Applicants are encouraged to discuss data-sharing plans with their NIH program contact. See Data-Sharing Policy or http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-032.html.
(b) Sharing Model Organisms: Regardless of the amount requested, all applications where the development of model organisms is anticipated are expected to include a description of a specific plan for sharing and distributing unique model organisms and related resources, or state appropriate reasons why such sharing is restricted or not possible. See Sharing Model Organisms Policy, and NIH Guide NOT-OD-04-042.
(c) Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS): Regardless of the amount requested, applicants seeking funding for a genome-wide association study are expected to provide a plan for submission of GWAS data to the NIH-designated GWAS data repository, or provide an appropriate explanation why submission to the repository is not possible. A genome-wide association study is defined as any study of genetic variation across the entire genome that is designed to identify genetic associations with observable traits (such as blood pressure or weight) or the presence or absence of a disease or condition. For further information see Policy for Sharing of Data Obtained in NIH Supported or Conducted Genome-Wide Association Studies, NIH Guide NOT-OD-07-088, and http://grants.nih.gov/grants/gwas/.
The DCC application should include an overall sharing plan for data generated during the funding of LABS. CC applications need not cite this plan in detail, but applicants should indicate their willingness to participate fully in it. The plan should indicate specifically what will be shared, with whom it will be shared (including the NIDDK Data Repository), when it will be shared, by what means it will be shared, and what conditions will apply to recipients of shared data. This plan must be approved by the NIDDK before awards will be issued under this RFA.
Section V. Application Review Information
1. Criteria
Only the review
criteria described below will be considered in the review process.
2. Review and Selection Process
Applications that are complete and responsive to the FOA will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate peer review group convened by NIDDK and in accordance with NIH peer review procedures (http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/peer/), using the review criteria stated below.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications will:
The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
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 meritorious 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? These criteria apply to the research plan that will be
described in the DCC application.
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? Is
it likely that the goals of the research plan described in the DCC application
will be achieved? What is the scientific and technical merit of the CC’s
proposed approach to meeting the requirements of the approved studies provided
in the DCC application?
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)? Additionally,
do the specific competence and previous experience of the professional,
technical and administrative staff of the CC or the DCC increase the likelihood
that the goals of the research plan described in the DCC application will be
achieved?
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? Is there evidence of adequate facilities, space, and
resources for the work proposed including evidence of an appropriate
organizational structure and institutional support? Do the collaborative
arrangements within the LABS consortium enhance the productivity of this
CC/DCC?
In
addition to the above review criteria, the following criteria will be applied
to applications in the determination of scientific merit and the priority
score.
COMMITMENT: Is there evidence of commitment to continue conduct of LABS for the full project period in accordance with policies and procedures established by the LABS steering committee?
Review of CC applicants also will be based on the following specific criteria:
Recruitment and Retention: Is there evidence that the CC will be able to meet their recruitment goals for and retention of research subjects in the LABS studies to which they have committed their participation?
Data and Sample Management: Is there an adequate plan to ensure accurate collection and timely transmission of study data to the DCC and patient samples as required by the approved LABS protocols?
Knowledge of Problems: Does the CC application demonstrate knowledge of the potential problems associated with the conduct of the LABS studies and feasible solutions to these problems?
Cooperative Experience: Is there evidence of willingness to work cooperatively in this study.
Collaborations between CCs within LABS: For those applicants who propose collaborative efforts between two groups to form a single CC, additional factors to be considered would include the advantages of the collaboration in terms of cost, recruitment, and facilities; the commitment of the participants to the collaboration; and the adequacy of plans to coordinate efforts.
Review of the DCC application also will be based on the following specific criteria:
Understanding of the scientific, statistical, logistical, and technical issues underlying the LABS multi-center studies and knowledge necessary to lead in the areas of study design, statistics, logistics, data acquisition and management, identification of and coordination with central laboratories and serum/tissue/data repositories, handling of laboratory specimens, quality control, data analysis, and consortium coordination.
Adequacy of the proposed plans for acquisition, transfer, management, and analysis of data, quality control of data collection and monitoring, and overall coordination of the LABS activities.
The expertise, training, and experience of the investigators and staff, including the administrative abilities of the Principal Investigator and co-investigators, and the time they plan to devote to the effective coordination of LABS.
The administrative, supervisory, and collaborative arrangements for achieving the goals of the program, including willingness to cooperate with the principal investigators of the CCs and the NIDDK.
Facilities, equipment, and organizational structure to effectively coordinate the LABS activities in implementing the protocols, providing for specialized laboratory testing, and data collection.
Ability to develop or modify Data Safety and Monitoring Plans for the LABS multisite clinical trials.
Expertise in setting up and managing databases.
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 rating:
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 on Human
Subjects in the PHS 398 instructions).
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 on Human Subjects in the
PHS 398 instructions).
Care
and Use of Vertebrate Animals in Research: If vertebrate animals are to
be used in the project, the five points described in the Vertebrate Animals
section of the Research Plan 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. Resource Sharing Plan(s)
When relevant, reviewers will be instructed to comment on the reasonableness of the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources. However, reviewers will not factor the proposed resource sharing plan(s) into the determination of scientific merit or priority score, unless noted otherwise in the FOA. Program staff within the IC will be responsible for monitoring the resource sharing.
The DCC application should include an overall sharing plan for resources generated during the funding of LABS. CC applications need not cite this plan in detail, but applicants should indicate their willingness to participate fully in it. The plan should indicate specifically what will be shared, with whom it will be shared (including the NIDDK Genetics Repository), when it will be shared, by what means it will be shared, and what conditions will apply to recipients of shared data. This plan must be approved by the NIDDK before awards will be issued under this RFA.
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.
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 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 Principal
Investigator will have the primary responsibility for all
aspects of the protocols, including any modification of study design; conduct
of the study including participant recruitment, safety and follow-up; assuring
quality of patient care and protocol adherence; data collection; quality
control; data and safety monitoring, data analysis and interpretation;
preparation of publications; and collaboration with other investigators, unless
otherwise provided for in these terms or by action of the Steering Committee.
Awardee(s) agree to the governance of the study through a Steering Committee.
Awardees will be required to accept and implement the common protocol(s) and
procedures approved by the Steering Committee and the Data and Safety
Monitoring Board.
All applicants will be required to participate in a cooperative and interactive manner with one another and with the DCC in all aspects of LABS.
Awardees will retain custody of and have primary rights to their data developed under these awards, subject to Government rights of access consistent with current HHS, PHS, and NIH policies. The collaborative protocol and governance policies will call for the continued submission of data centrally to the DCC for a collaborative database; procedures for data analysis, reporting and publication; and procedures to protect and ensure the privacy of medical and genetic data (if any) and records of individuals. The NIDDK Project Scientist, on behalf of the NIDDK, will have the same access, privileges and responsibilities regarding the collaborative data as the other members of the Steering Committee.
All awardees will be responsible for implementing the core data collection method and strategy collectively decided upon by the Steering Committee. For a study involving multiple institutions, it is the responsibility of each awardee/site to ensure that data will be submitted in a timely way to the central Data Coordinating Center. Additionally, individual investigators/sites must demonstrate the ability to implement the strategy specifically designed for their individual study population.
Awardees are responsible for ensuring accurate and timely assessment of the progress of each study, including development of procedures to ensure that data collection and management are: (1) adequate for quality control and analysis; (2) for clinical trials, as simple as appropriate in order to encourage maximum participation of physicians and patients and to avoid unnecessary expense; and (3) sufficiently staffed across the participating institutions. For research involving multiple awards, strategies for the analyses of pooled data will be developed by the Steering Committee.
Awardees are responsible for submitting interim progress reports, when requested, to the NIDDK Program Director including as a minimum, summary data on protocol performance. For coordinated multiple awards or a multi-site single award, the Steering Committee may require additional information from individual awardees/sites. Such reports are in addition to the annual awardee noncompeting continuation progress report
Awardees are responsible for establishing procedures, where applicable, for all participating institutions in coordinated awards to comply with FDA regulations for studies involving investigational agents or devices and to comply with the requirements of 45 CFR Part 46 for the protection of human subjects, and the NIH policy requirements for the inclusion of women, minorities and children.
The Data Coordinating Center will be involved in collaborations with the NIDDK and the Clinical Centers during all phases of the study. Thus, the awardee is expected to work cooperatively with Clinical Centers and sponsoring organizations in a multicenter study and oversee the implementation of and adherence to a common protocol, as well as assure quality control of the data collected and storage of collected specimens. In addition to organizing and attending regular meetings, the Data Coordinating Center will be expected to maintain close communications with the NIDDK Project Scientist and the Principal Investigators of the Clinical Centers.
Awardees are encouraged to publish and to publicly release and disseminate results, data and other products of the study, concordant with the study protocol and governance and the approved plan for making data and materials available to the scientific community and the NIDDK.
Support or other involvement of industry or any other third party in any study performed by the Consortium -- e.g., participation by the third party; involvement of project resources or citing the name of the project or the NIDDK support; or special access to project results, data, findings or resources -- may be advantageous and appropriate. However, except for licensing of patents or copyrights, support or involvement of any third party will occur only following notification to, and concurrence by, NIDDK.
Upon completion of the project, the DCC is
expected to transfer all study intervention materials and procedure manuals
into the NIDDK Data and Biorepository, which in accordance with current NIDDK
and NIH policies, will make them available to the scientific community for the
conduct of research at no charge other than the costs of reproduction and
distribution.
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 will name a Project Scientist from within the Division of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition whose function will be to assist the Steering Committee in carrying out the study. NIDDK will have one vote for all key study group subcommittees, regardless of the number of NIDDK personnel involved.
The Project Scientist will have substantial scientific programmatic involvement in quality control, interim data analysis, safety monitoring, and final data analysis and interpretation, preparation of publications, and coordination and performance monitoring. The dominant role and prime responsibility for these activities resides with the awardees for the project as a whole, although specific tasks and activities in carrying out the studies will be shared among the awardees and the NIDDK Project Scientist.
Other NIDDK Project Scientist responsibilities and levels of involvement in the project, as described below.
1. For multi-institutional protocols, participation in the Steering Committee that oversees study conduct. The NIDDK Project Scientist or designee will be a full participant and voting member of the Steering Committee and, if applicable, subcommittees.
2. Serves as a resource with respect to other ongoing NIDDK activities that may be relevant to the protocol to facilitate compatibility and avoid unnecessary duplication of effort.
3. Has substantial involvement in assisting in the design and coordination of research activities for awardees as elaborated below:
The NIDDK Program Official responsibilities include:
1. Retaining overall programmatic responsibility for the award, and will clearly specify to the awardee the name(s) and role (s) of any additional individuals with substantial involvement in the project and the lines of reporting authority.
2. Interacting with the Principal Investigator(s) on a regular basis to monitor study progress. Monitoring may include: regular communications with the principal investigator and staff, periodic site visits for discussions with awardee research teams, observation of field data collection and management techniques, quality control, fiscal review, and other relevant matters; as well as attendance at Steering Committee, data safety and monitoring board, and related meetings. The NIDDK retains the option of periodic external review of progress.
3. Reviewing and approving protocols to insure they are within the scope of peer review and for safety considerations, as required by Federal regulations. The NIDDK Program Official will monitor protocol progress, and may request that a protocol study be closed to accrual for reasons including: (a) accrual rate insufficient to complete study in a timely fashion; (b) accrual goals met early; (c) poor protocol performance; (d) patient safety and regulatory concerns; (e) study results that are already conclusive; and (f) emergence of new information that diminishes the scientific importance of the study question. The NIDDK will not permit further expenditures of NIDDK funds for a study after requesting closure (except for patients already on-study).
4. Making recommendations for continued funding based on: a) overall study progress, including sufficient patient and/or data accrual; b) cooperation in carrying out the research (e.g., attendance at Steering Committee meetings, implementation of group decisions, compliance with the terms of award and reporting requirements); and/or c) maintenance of a high quality of research, which will allow pooling of data and comparisons across multiple cooperative agreement awards for common data elements.
The NIDDK reserves the right to terminate or curtail the study (or an individual award) in the event of (a) failure to develop or implement a mutually agreeable collaborative protocol, (b) substantial shortfall in participant recruitment, follow-up, data reporting, quality control, or other major breach of the protocol, (c) substantive changes in the agreed-upon protocol with which NIDDK cannot concur, (d) reaching a major study endpoint substantially before schedule with persuasive statistical significance, or (e) human subject ethical issues that may dictate a premature termination.
2.A.3. Collaborative Responsibilities
The Steering Committee, composed of each of
the Principal Investigators of the DCC, the CCs and the NIDDK Project Scientist
will be the main governing board of the studies. Only the principal
investigators and the NIDDK Project Scientist or designee will be voting
members of the Steering Committee and all major scientific decisions will be
determined by a majority vote. This committee will have the primary
responsibility for approval of the common protocols, facilitating the conduct
of participant follow-up, monitoring completeness of data collection and timely
transmission of data to the DCC, and reporting the study results. It will
also be responsible for establishing study policies in such areas as access to
patient data, ancillary studies, publications and presentations, and
performance standards.
A Chairperson or Chairpersons will be chosen from among the Steering Committee members by the NIDDK from among the principal investigators (but not the NIDDK Project Scientist or Data Coordinating Center Principal Investigator) or alternatively, from among experts in an appropriate scientific field who is not participating directly in the study. The Chairperson is responsible for coordinating the Committee activities, for preparing meeting agendas, and for scheduling and chairing meetings. Subcommittees will be established on topics such as ancillary studies, publications and presentations, quality control, recruitment, protocol adherence, among others.
An Executive Committee comprised of the Study Chair(s), the Principal Investigator of the Coordinating Center, and the NIDDK Project Scientist will be convened to effect management decisions required between Steering Committee meetings, as needed for efficient progress of the trial.
Each CC Awardee and the DCC Awardee agree to the governance of the study through the Steering Committee. Meetings of the Steering Committee will ordinarily be held by telephone conference calls or in the Washington DC Metropolitan Area.
The NIDDK Project Director (and the other cited NIDDK scientists) may work with awardees on issues coming before the Steering Committee and, as appropriate, other committees, e.g., issues of recruitment, intervention, 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 enrollment. Regardless of the number of NIH staff participating in technical advisory roles, the NIDDK will be limited to one vote on the Steering Committee.
An independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) will be established by the NIDDK to review protocols and monitor patient safety and performance of each study. As a part of its responsibilities, the DSMB will submit recommendations to the NIDDK regarding the continuation of each study. The DSMB will be responsible for final approval of the Data and Safety Monitoring Plan developed by the DCC. Because the DSMB serves as an independent group advisory to the NIDDK, study investigators will not communicate with the Board members regarding study issues, except as authorized by the Boards Executive Secretary.
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 Non-Competing
Continuation Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590) annually and financial
statements as required in the NIH Grants
Policy Statement.
A final
progress report, invention statement, and Financial Status Report are required
when an award is relinquished when a recipient changes institutions or when an
award is terminated.
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:
Carolyn W. Miles, Ph.D.
Division
of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease
6707
Democracy Boulevard, Room 665
Bethesda, MD 20892-5450
Telephone:
(301) 451-2759
FAX:
(301) 480-8300
Email: [email protected]
2. Peer Review Contacts:
Francisco O. Calvo, Ph.D.
Division
of Extramural Activities
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
6707
Democracy Boulevard, Room 752
Bethesda, MD 20892-5452
Telephone:
(301) 594-8885
FAX:
(301) 480-3505
Email: [email protected]
3. Financial or Grants Management Contacts:
Ms. Sharon Bourque
Division
of Extramural Activities
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
6707
Democracy Boulevard, Room 719
Bethesda, MD 20892-5456
Telephone:
(301) 594-8846
FAX:
(301) 480-3504
Email: [email protected]
Section
VIII. Other Information
Required Federal Citations
Use of Animals in
Research:
Recipients of
PHS support for activities involving live, vertebrate animals must comply with
PHS Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/PHSPolicyLabAnimals.pdf)
as mandated by the Health Research Extension Act of 1985 (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/hrea1985.htm),
and the USDA Animal Welfare Regulations (http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/legislat/usdaleg1.htm)
as applicable.
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.
Policy
for Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS):
NIH is interested in advancing genome-wide association
studies (GWAS) to identify common genetic factors that influence health and
disease through a centralized GWAS data repository. For the purposes of this
policy, a genome-wide association study is defined as any study of genetic
variation across the entire human genome that is designed to identify genetic
associations with observable traits (such as blood pressure or weight), or the
presence or absence of a disease or condition. All applications, regardless of
the amount requested, proposing a genome-wide association study are expected to
provide a plan for submission of GWAS data to the NIH-designated GWAS data
repository, or provide an appropriate explanation why submission to the
repository is not possible. Data repository management (submission and access)
is governed by the Policy for Sharing of Data Obtained in NIH Supported or
Conducted Genome-Wide Association Studies, NIH Guide NOT-OD-07-088.
For additional information, see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/gwas/.
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 public
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.
Sharing of Model
Organisms:
NIH is committed to
support efforts that encourage sharing of important research resources
including the sharing of model organisms for biomedical research (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/model_organism/index.htm).
At the same time the NIH recognizes the rights of grantees and contractors to
elect and retain title to subject inventions developed with Federal funding
pursuant to the Bayh Dole Act (see the NIH Grants Policy Statement http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/index.htm).
All investigators submitting an NIH application or contract proposal, beginning
with the October 1, 2004 receipt date, are expected to include in the
application/proposal a description of a specific plan for sharing and
distributing unique model organism research resources generated using NIH funding
or state why such sharing is restricted or not possible. This will permit other
researchers to benefit from the resources developed with public funding. The
inclusion of a model organism sharing plan is not subject to a cost threshold
in any year and is expected to be included in all applications where the
development of model organisms is anticipated.
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 Requirement:
In
accordance with the NIH Public Access Policy (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-08-033.html)
investigators must submit or have submitted for them their final, peer-reviewed
manuscripts that arise from NIH funds and are accepted for publication as of
April 7, 2008 to PubMed Central (http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/), to be made publicly
available no later than 12 months after publication. As of May 27, 2008,
investigators must include the PubMed Central reference number when citing an
article in NIH applications, proposals, and progress reports that fall under
the policy, and was authored or co-authored by the investigator or arose from
the investigator’s NIH award. For more information, see the Public
Access webpage at http://publicaccess.nih.gov/.
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 FOA 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® |
||||||