Part 1. Overview Information

Key Dates

All applications are due by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. 

Applicants are encouraged to apply early to allow adequate time to make any corrections to errors found in the application during the submission process by the due date.

It is critical that applicants follow the Multi-Project (M) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this NOFO or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts). Conformance to all requirements (both in the How to Apply - Application Guide and the NOFO) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the How to Apply - Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions. Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.

There are several options available to submit your application through Grants.gov to NIH and Department of Health and Human Services partners. You must use one of these submission options to access the application forms for this opportunity.

1. Use the NIH ASSIST system to prepare, submit and track your application online.
2. Use an institutional system-to-system (S2S) solution to prepare and submit your application to Grants.gov and eRA Commons to track your application. Check with your institutional officials regarding availability.
   
   



Table of Contents
Part 1. Overview Information
Key Dates
Part 2. Full Text of Announcement
Section I. Notice of Funding Opportunity Description
Section II. Award Information
Section III. Eligibility Information
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
Section V. Application Review Information
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Section VII. Agency Contacts
Section VIII. Other Information

Part 2. Full Text of Announcement

Section I. Notice of Funding Opportunity Description

Program Objectives

The objective of the Diabetes Research Centers (DRCs) is to bring together, on a cooperative basis, basic and clinical investigators to enhance the effectiveness and synergy around research in diabetes, its complications, and related areas of endocrinology and metabolic disease. DRCs are meant to improve communication among investigators and to integrate, coordinate, and foster interdisciplinary research. To accomplish this mission, the Diabetes Research Centers support a group of established investigators actively conducting programs of important, high-quality research and provide the opportunity to synergize, through the DRC structure, with other Centers and NIDDK programs. It also provides a rich environment to enhance workforce development of both basic and clinical investigators. The overall purpose of the Diabetes Research Centers program is to provide the capability for accomplishments greater than those that would be possible by individual research project grant support alone.

This Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) aligns with the Mission and Vision of the NIDDK Strategic Plan for Research, including the theme of empowering a multidisciplinary workforce, engaging a broad range of partners, and pursuing pathways for the health of all. Specifically, this NOFO aligns with the scientific goals 1.1, 1.3., 1.4., 2.2, 2.3 and 2.5, of the Strategic Plan.
 

Institution and Research Base
The DRC program is intended to bring together investigators from a variety of scientific disciplines in a manner that enhances and extends the effectiveness of their research. A DRC must be an identifiable unit either within a single institution, such as a university medical center, or a consortium of cooperating institutions. DRC applications must demonstrate an existing strong base of successful external research funding in basic and/or clinical research in diabetes and/or related areas of metabolism and endocrinology within NIDDK’s mission. Program excellence includes a consistent and outstanding record of publications and peer-reviewed research funding in related areas. DRCs are expected to leverage relevant skills and collaborations with other institutions and affiliated agencies to demonstrate a diverse scientific base that includes well-established and funded academic diabetes researchers and multidisciplinary expertise for addressing the scientific themes proposed. 

The currently funded research base provides the major support for those who would benefit from a Center's shared resources. The research base includes only currently funded, peer-reviewed research grants awarded to the applicant institution/consortium, including Federal and privately funded research awards. There must be sufficient Federal support within the base to fulfill the requirement for a minimum of two federally funded Center members utilizing each Biomedical Research Core. Training grants, education grants, other NIH Center awards, and fellowship awards are not considered part of the research base, but opportunities for collaboration and synergy should be discussed. The focus, relevance, interrelationships, quality, productivity, and, to some extent, quantity are all important considerations for the adequacy of the research base. The quality of the biomedical research base will be given emphasis in the peer review process. 

The research base for the Center, including any affiliated hospitals and proposed partners, must consist of at least $3 million per year in direct costs of peer-reviewed research projects. At least 30 percent of the total funding contributing to the research base must be secured from the NIDDK. Since "Facilities and Administration" costs vary considerably between institutions, these should not be included in the calculation of the research base. While collaboration and synergy between and among other NIDDK-funded Centers is strongly encouraged with this NOFO, overlap in the research base among NIDDK-funded Centers should not inappropriately inflate the research base of any Center.

Collaborations with investigators outside of the applicant institution/consortium or between DRCs are highly encouraged as these often benefit the DRC’s research base. Examples of benefits resulting from collaboration with an investigator outside of the applicant institution/consortium include enhanced quality/impact of the research base's scientific output, increased productivity, or peer-reviewed funding arising directly from the collaboration. Examples of benefits resulting from collaboration with one or more other DRCs could be more efficient use of resources by cooperating across DRCs, an augmented enrichment program, leveraging of P&F funds, enhanced quality/impact of the DRC's scientific output, increased productivity, or peer-reviewed funding arising directly from the collaboration. Collaborations with other Core Centers supported by NIDDK are also encouraged and might similarly benefit the DRC's research base. Non-research base investigators at the applicant institution or elsewhere may be encouraged to make use of the core facilities, collaborate with Center members, and participate in enrichment activities when space, time, and funds permit.

The DRC must have a central research focus or theme in diabetes and/or related endocrinology and metabolic diseases. The organization and structure of the DRC should reflect the goals of the Center, encourage collaboration, develop and implement Center-wide initiatives, promote the use of shared core resources, and oversee the funding of Pilot and Feasibility projects. The structure of the DRC can change as needed based on new scientific opportunities and partnerships thus allowing for modifications of programmatic and scientific activities to fully capitalize on the most exciting research opportunities. 

Existing, competing Centers are encouraged to focus their efforts and emphasize the unique aspects that their Center brings to the diabetes/endocrinology/metabolic diseases research community. Given the limitation of available resources, DRCs that provide a more focused direction should be considered and may be necessary to avoid diluting the effectiveness of the limited Center support available. Therefore, it is not necessary for each competing Center to show growth in their research base when they have made the strategic decision to focus their Center membership rather than continuously expand. A flat or even slightly reduced research base in a renewal application is acceptable. When a reduction results in a more thematically focused DRC, with added benefit to Center members, this is appropriate and viewed as a positive development. 

DRCs are expected to have "members", and the criteria for becoming a DRC member must be clearly defined and well justified. All research base investigators must be DRC members. Suitable criteria for membership include peer-reviewed independent funding, participation in DRC-related research, and need for the use of core facilities. Designation of an individual without the need for use of core facilities as a Center member should be rare and must be well justified. Additional membership categories/subsets of members based on a researcher's degree of participation or other quantitative measures are acceptable, but eligibility criteria must be clearly defined and well justified. Given the Notice of NIH's Interest in Diversity, (see NOT-OD-20-031), DRCs are strongly encouraged to recruit prospective scientists from diverse backgrounds, including individuals from underrepresented groups for potential participation in both their DRC leadership and membership.

Center applications from new centers are encouraged and are expected to bring diverse perspectives, novel thematic focus, innovative resources, and unique collaborative opportunities to the NIDDK Diabetes Centers Program. Unique aspects of a new Center application may include: 1) a geographical area that includes underserved populations with a high burden of diabetes (i.e., prevalence, incidence) and related metabolic diseases; 2) collaborations with programs that support IDeA centers; 3) thematic focus that synergizes with and/or adds to those already supported by the current DRCs; and 4) opportunities to promote a diverse and inclusive base of diabetes researchers. For current Diabetes Centers, see https://diabetescenters.org/

Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives (PEDP)

This NOFO requires a Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives (PEDP) as described in NOT-MH-21-310, submitted as Other Project Information as an attachment (see Section IV). Applicants are strongly encouraged to read the NOFO instructions carefully and view the available PEDP guidance material. The PEDP will be assessed as part of the scientific and technical peer review evaluation, as well as considered among programmatic matters with respect to funding decisions. 

Center Structure and Activities
 

Administrative Core (includes an Enrichment Program)
Each DRC must include an Administrative Core that will be responsible for allocation and oversight of Center resources. The Administrative Core is expected to ensure the coordination and integration of DRC components and activities. Administrative Core personnel provide support for the required External Advisory Committee and the internal committee structure of the Center. 

The Administrative Core should have a process to a) assess the productivity, effectiveness, and appropriateness of Center activities; b) determine criteria and selection process for Center membership; c) foster collaborations and scientific opportunities among its members; and d) work with other DRCs and NIDDK Center programs and Coordinating Centers (see below section on “Interaction with Coordinating Centers”) to facilitate administration of regional and/or national programs. In addition, all DRCs will be required to maintain an institutional Center website, with the Administrative Core taking primary responsibility for its curation and oversight, as well as for ensuring proper and seamless integration of the Center website with the NIDDK Diabetes Research Center program website http://www.diabetescenters.org/ 


The Administrative Core must support an Enrichment Program that will build a community of diabetes researchers by providing enrichment activities to foster multidisciplinary approaches to diabetes research and to attract new investigators or investigators with relevant expertise to diabetes research. While many of these activities occur at the grantee institution, applicants are encouraged to suggest coordinated efforts, such as educational activities, that might operate on a regional or national level and involve multiple Diabetes Research Centers. 

Funding support for the Enrichment Program under the auspices of the Administrative Core may be requested. Support for visiting scientists, seminars, and research forums are appropriate items for inclusion in an enrichment program as well as any appropriate, innovative means to support the goals of the Center, e.g. workshops, etc. Also, limited travel support may be requested to allow DRC investigators, particularly early-stage and junior investigators, to learn new laboratory techniques, to develop new collaborations, or to engage in scientific information exchange. 

In all cases, the enrichment program should further the overall aims and objectives of the DRC as well as its cores. Creative new programs, not precluded by NIH or NIDDK policies, are encouraged. While DRCs may not support stipends for graduate students or postdoctoral fellows, the environment fostered by the existence of the Center with its core facilities in conjunction with its enrichment program and educational opportunities should serve to foster the careers of students, postdoctoral fellows and junior faculty, including K-awardees.

Biomedical Resource Cores
Diabetes Research Centers are designed around Research Cores that provide shared, specialized technical resources and/or expertise that enhance the efficiency, productivity, and multidisciplinary nature of research performed by Center-affiliated investigators. The goal of the Diabetes Research Center program is to make state-of-the art technologies and resources readily accessible to a broad spectrum of investigators who are pursuing studies in relevant topic areas. Cores are intended to facilitate basic and clinical research in diabetes, endocrinology and metabolic diseases in order to accomplish the stated goals of the individual Center and of the NIDDK Centers program.

Each Research Core should provide state-of-the art services to multiple, funded research projects. Examples of Core services/resources include, but are not limited to, functional/biological imaging; integrative physiology (human and/or animal); islet isolation and function; computational biology or bioinformatics applications to diabetes; and support of clinical research. Applicants are encouraged to propose cores that address specific objectives based on the unique requirements of investigators at the applicant institution(s). Particular emphasis should be placed on services that support and foster interdisciplinary, integrated and translational approaches to research in Diabetes Center topic areas. Preference will be given to diabetes-related core support services that are not readily available or cost-effective when supplied from commercial sources, and techniques or technologies that may be technically challenging or require specialized expertise, equipment or infrastructure.

Justification for proposing a Core

The establishment and continued support of biomedical research cores within a Center are justified on the basis of significant use by independently funded Center investigators. If a proposed DRC core is an institutional (or departmental) shared research core, applicants must provide a strong rationale and compelling justification by addressing the value added for Center members. Justification could include : 1) providing added value and access to the resource beyond that provided through fee-for-service; 2) providing a unique resource that would not otherwise by available to individual Center members because it is too costly too labor-intensive, or too specialized; 3) providing a service more effectively than would be feasible in individual cores, therefore avoiding duplication and lowering cost for Center members; or 4) the service/instrumentation/expertise exists only with the participation of multiple centers and their members’ user fees in proportion to by-in from center to which they belong.

Leveraging of limited NIDDK resources across funded Center programs is a priority. Therefore, the need for core support from the Diabetes Research Center must be well-justified with a broad user base of NIH-funded investigators pursuing research activities in Center topic areas. The relevance and utilization of the core services by the research base will be emphasized during the review process. Synergy and avoiding duplication among DRC-supported cores should be a priority so as to leverage NIDDK-supported resources. Centers are encouraged to interact with the broader research community, serving as resources to support research of importance to NIDDK. Therefore, Core usage by (1) Members of other DRCs; (2) Members of other NIDDK-funded Centers; and (3) Non-Center members, both locally and nationally, is encouraged when Core capacity allows and institutional policies can be accommodated.

Additional Core Activities

1. Teaching new or complex techniques and methodologies is an important function of a Core. When appropriate, Core staff should provide instruction for investigators, laboratory personnel, and/or fellows to learn, and then become proficient in, technologies that will become part of the repertoire of the user's laboratory.
2. In addition to providing products or services, a Core must ensure appropriate quality control and maintain a record of use. Limited developmental research is also an appropriate function of a Core facility if it is directly related to enhancing the function or usefulness of the Core and is not an undertaking that should more appropriately be funded through other mechanisms. As part of each Core, applicants should provide plans for responding to the changing needs of the Center members.
    

Pilot and Feasibility Program
The Diabetes Research Center Pilot and Feasibility (P&F) program provides modest support (typically up to $50,000 direct costs per year for 1-2 years) for new initiatives or feasibility research studies in Diabetes Center topic areas. At least 25% of the overall Center direct costs, exclusive of equipment and consortium Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs, should be devoted for support of P&F projects. 

The P and F program is particularly directed at early-stage or new investigators to provide them minimal support for collecting required preliminary data sufficient to support a grant application for independent research in diabetes/metabolic disease focused area. The P&F program should also focus on supporting emerging physician scientists. Pilot and feasibility study support is not intended for large projects by established investigators that would otherwise be submitted as separate research grant applications or to support or supplement ongoing funded research. 

The solicitation and review of P&F applications, as well as the review of progress and management of the P&F program reside within each Center. This approach provides each Center with the needed flexibility for effective and efficient management of their P&F program. DRCs are encouraged to partner with other NIDDK-funded Center programs at their Institution and/or regionally to synergize the process of soliciting, reviewing and managing their P&F programs. DRCs should also participate in contributing to and updating a national reviewer database that is maintained by the NIDDK Diabetes Centers website https://diabetescenters.org/ 

Additional Opportunities for Resource Cores and Programs
The principal goal of the opportunities listed below is to provide NIDDK Diabetes Center research core services and pilot and feasibility grant opportunities to support diabetes researchers at institutions that are not currently served by an NIDDK Diabetes Research Center. Mechanisms to provide outreach to other Diabetes researchers, not part of the DRC membership, is a priority for NIDDK/DEM. Diabetes Research Centers are encouraged to propose partnerships that establish research cores and/or P&F programs at institutions of higher education [i.e., rural institutions, historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs), Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs) and institutions with a historical commitment to educating individuals from underrepresented groups], or other agencies that focus on underserved populations or populations with significant health disparities. The primary goal of such partnerships is to foster scientific collaborations and to provide access to the Diabetes Research Center infrastructure to investigators at these institutions or organizations to foster health disparities research in populations disproportionately affected by diabetes. 

1) To broaden the scope and reach of the Diabetes Research Center P&F program, a Center may propose to serve a wider scientific community by expanding the Diabetes Center P&F program to a different institution(s). In general, NIDDK currently expects Diabetes Research Centers to allow investigators at affiliated hospitals or institutions to participate in the Center P&F program. Expansion of the P&F program to an affiliated institution/hospital is encouraged but is not sufficient to be considered a Regional/National program for purposes of expanding the allowable requested funds. However, applicants may request funds to expand their P&F program to researchers at non-Diabetes Research Center institutions. DRCs are strongly encouraged to support individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds as well as individuals with disabilities through the P&F program. Please note that the race, ethnicity, or sex of faculty or participants will not be considered in the application review process or when making funding decisions.

2) To broaden the scope and reach of current research core services, a Center may propose to serve a wider scientific community on a geographic or national level through the establishment of a Regional/National Shared Resource Core that is located at a different institution. Such a Regional/National Core may not be established with an affiliated hospital of the applicant organization; such an arrangement would be considered an institutional, rather than a regional/national, core for the purposes of this NOFO. If the Center is primarily located at an affiliated hospital, then core(s) based at another affiliated hospital of the same academic institution will not be considered Regional/National Shared Resource Cores. In contrast, with a regional or national core located at a different institution, the Center will service a specific research base that is expanded beyond investigators at the academic institution and/or affiliated hospitals where the Center is primarily located. Support for the expansion of the Center P&F program to investigators at the institution where the Regional/National Shared Resource Core is located is also encouraged.

Cooperation, Coordination, and Integration
To leverage resources funded through NIDDK (and across NIH) cooperation, coordination and integration with other Centers across the institution(s) where the DRC is housed as well as with other DRCs regionally (or even potentially nationally) is an important component of the DRC structure. Applicants from institutions with an NIH Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program (https://ncats.nih.gov/ctsa) are strongly encouraged to utilize the CTSA as a resource for enhancing clinical research programs within the Diabetes Research Center. Diabetes Research Center directors should also seek opportunities for collaboration and synergy not only with other NIDDK-funded Diabetes Research Centers and their programs but also with other NIDDK-funded Centers. Examples of these include: the Centers for Diabetes Translation Research (http://www.diabetes-translation.org,) Nutrition Obesity Research Centers (http://www.norccentral.org,) the Digestive Diseases Research Centers (https://www.niddk.nih.gov/research-funding/research-programs/digestive-disease-centers,) and the Cystic Fibrosis Research and Translation Centers (https://www.cysticfibrosiscenters.org/.) Synergy with other DDEM programs and consortia that take advantage of existing NIDDK resources to enhance thematic focus and reach, such as the Human Islet Research network (https://hirnetwork.org/ ), the MMPC-Live (https://www.mmpc.org/ ); as well as new and established clinical studies/trials such as TrialNET (https://www.trialnet.org/), TEDDY (https://teddy.epi.usf.edu/) or RADIANT (https://www.atypicaldiabetesnetwork.org/) are strongly encouraged. 

Center Evaluation

It is anticipated that research advances, development of new research technologies/methods, and the changes in composition of the research base will require existing DRCs to evolve over time. DRCs are encouraged to develop a plan to continuously evaluate and respond to the changing needs of their research base members by adding, eliminating, or expanding Cores/core services during the course of the DRC.

DRC Directors' Meeting

Every 12-18 months, all DRC Directors and Center administrators are expected to attend a meeting at one of the DRCs to exchange information, highlight the host Center, and interact with NIDDK senior staff. Regional meetings among DRC Directors and members, as well as with scientifically aligned NIDDK-funded Center programs, is also encouraged. These meetings may be focused on, but not limited to, the following: 1) across program networking and career development of P&F awardees; 2) addressing administrative issues across Center programs as a means towards synergizing and leveraging expertise; or 3) scientific discussions and brainstorming of timely scientific topics.

Applicants are encouraged to consult with NIDDK staff concerning plans for the development of the Diabetes Research Center and the organization of the application.

See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.

Investigators proposing NIH-defined clinical trials may refer to the Research Methods Resources website for information about developing statistical methods and study designs.

Section II. Award Information

NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made from this NOFO.

Section III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants

Higher Education Institutions

• Public/State Controlled Institutions of Higher Education
• Private Institutions of Higher Education

The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:

• Hispanic-serving Institutions
• Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
• Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs)
• Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions
• Asian American Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISIs)

Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education

• Nonprofits with 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)
• Nonprofits without 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)

For-Profit Organizations

• Small Businesses
• For-Profit Organizations (Other than Small Businesses)

Local Governments

• State Governments
• County Governments
• City or Township Governments
• Special District Governments
• Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Federally Recognized)
• Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Other than Federally Recognized)

Federal Governments

• Eligible Agencies of the Federal Government
• U.S. Territory or Possession

Other

• Independent School Districts
• Public Housing Authorities/Indian Housing Authorities
• Native American Tribal Organizations (other than Federally recognized tribal governments)
• Faith-based or Community-based Organizations
• Regional Organizations

Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Organization) are not eligible to apply.

Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.

Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed. 

Applicant organizations

Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the How to Apply- Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as possible. Failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission, please reference NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications for additional information.

• System for Award Management (SAM) – Applicants must complete and maintain an active registration, which requires renewal at least annually. The renewal process may require as much time as the initial registration. SAM registration includes the assignment of a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code for domestic organizations which have not already been assigned a CAGE Code.
  • NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code – Foreign organizations must obtain an NCAGE code (in lieu of a CAGE code) in order to register in SAM.
  • Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) - A UEI is issued as part of the SAM.gov registration process. The same UEI must be used for all registrations, as well as on the grant application.
• eRA Commons - Once the unique organization identifier is established, organizations can register with eRA Commons in tandem with completing their Grants.gov registration; all registrations must be in place by time of submission. eRA Commons requires organizations to identify at least one Signing Official (SO) and at least one Program Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) account in order to submit an application.
• Grants.gov – Applicants must have an active SAM registration in order to complete the Grants.gov registration.

Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))

All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account.  PD(s)/PI(s) should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate their existing account with the applicant organization in eRA Commons. If the PD/PI is also the organizational Signing Official, they must have two distinct eRA Commons accounts, one for each role. Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.

Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with his/her organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from diverse backgrounds, including individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, individuals with disabilities, and women are always encouraged to apply for NIH support. See, Reminder: Notice of NIH's Encouragement of Applications Supporting Individuals from Underrepresented Ethnic and Racial Groups as well as Individuals with Disabilities, NOT-OD-22-019. 

For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the How to Apply - Application Guide.

Because a Diabetes Research Center has a large and complex administrative structure, the PD/PI must have strong leadership abilities and demonstrated proficiency in managing large, multi-component programs. The Diabetes Research Center PD(s)/PI(s) must also be willing to participate in annual meetings of the Center Directors.

2. Cost Sharing

This NOFO does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 1.2- Definitions of Terms.

3. Additional Information on Eligibility

Number of Applications

Only one application per institution (normally identified by having a unique DUNS number of NIH IPF number) is allowed.

The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time per NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.7.4 Submission of Resubmission Application. This means that the NIH will not accept:

• A new (A0) application that is submitted before issuance of the summary statement from the review of an overlapping new (A0) or resubmission (A1) application.
• A resubmission (A1) application that is submitted before issuance of the summary statement from the review of the previous new (A0) application.
• An application that has substantial overlap with another application pending appeal of initial peer review (see NIH Grants Policy Statement 2.3.9.4 Similar, Essentially Identical, or Identical Applications).

Research Base: Successful Diabetes Research Center applications require an existing program of excellence in biomedical research in diabetes, its complications, and in related research in endocrine and metabolic diseases. To justify Center support, the Diabetes Research Center must serve a large research base of NIDDK-funded investigators pursuing research activities in Center topic areas, as well as diabetes investigators with other sources of peer-reviewed support. The research base for the Center, including any affiliated hospitals or proposed partners, must consist of at least $3,000,000 per year in direct costs of peer-reviewed research projects. At least 30 percent of the total funding contributing to the research base must be secured from the NIDDK. Since "Facilities and Administration" costs vary considerably between institutions, these should not be included in the calculation of the research base.

Section IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Requesting an Application Package

The application forms package specific to this opportunity must be accessed through ASSIST or an institutional system-to-system solution. A button to apply using ASSIST is available in Part 1 of this NOFO. See the administrative office for instructions if planning to use an institutional system-to-system solution.

2. Content and Form of Application Submission

It is critical that applicants follow the Multi-Project (M) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide, except where instructed in this notice of funding opportunity to do otherwise and where instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide are directly related to the Grants.gov downloadable forms currently used with most NIH opportunities. Conformance to the requirements in the How to Apply - Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.

Letter of Intent

Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information that it contains allows IC staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review.

By the date listed in Part 1. Overview Information, prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:

• Descriptive title of proposed activity
• Name(s), address(es), and telephone number(s) of the PD(s)/PI(s)
• Names of other key personnel
• Participating institution(s)
• Number and title of this funding opportunity
   

The letter of intent should be sent to:

John Connaughton, Ph.D.
Chief, Scientific Review Branch
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: 301-594-7797
Email: NIDDKLetterofIntent@mail.nih.gov

Page Limitations

All page limitations described in the How to Apply- Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.

Instructions for the Submission of Multi-Component Applications

The following section supplements the instructions found in How to Apply- Application Guide and should be used for preparing a multi-component application.

The application should consist of the following components:

• Overall (use for Center Overview): Required
• Administrative Core (with Enrichment Program): Required
• Biomedical Research Cores: Required
• Pilot and Feasibility Program: Required

Overall Component

When preparing the application, use Component Type ‘Overall’.

All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.

SF424(R&R) Cover (Overall)

Complete entire form.

PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement (Overall)

Note: Human Embryonic Stem Cell lines from other components should be repeated in cell line table in Overall component.

Research & Related Other Project Information (Overall)

Follow standard instructions.

Project Summary/Abstract: Describe the scientific theme(s) of the Diabetes Research Center and the need for a Center to support the investigators in the research base. Include the number of Center members and the overall direct costs present in the research base. Provide a brief overview of the research base as it relates to the theme(s) of the Center, as well as an overview of the Biomedical Research Cores, and the Pilot & Feasibility and Enrichment programs.
Project Narrative: In 1-3 sentences describe the relevance of the research to be supported and facilitated by Center activities (Core services; Pilot and Feasibility, and Enrichment programs) on public health.
Facilities and Other Resources: Describe the existing environment and facilities briefly in the context of how the Center will use or change existing access, space, and usage; include space maps as needed. Scientific personnel and institutional resources capable of supporting the research base must be available.

Equipment: A general listing of major, shared pieces of equipment to be used by Center members should be provided. Note: Specific research core facilities, equipment, and special resources should be listed in each proposed biomedical research core component.

Other Attachments: The following attachments must be included with the Center Overview in order to aid in the review of applications. The filename provided for each attachment will be the name used for the bookmark in the application image. All attachments need to be in .pdf format.

Grant Support: Please title this attachment “Grant Support” and include all Federal and non-federal grant support for Diabetes Research Center members. Complete and organize alphabetically by the last name of the Center Investigator who is listed as the PD/PI on the grant. Include Supporting Organization/Grant Numbers, Complete Grant Title, Project Period, Annual Direct Costs, and Identify Other NIDDK Centers (if the grant listed is also included in its research base). The attachment should include, in order: Current Grant Support (Table A.1), Other Grant Support (Table A.2) and Pending Grant Support (Table A.3). The 'Current Grant Support' table should include research project grants relevant to diabetes and related endocrinology and metabolic diseases research, the PI/PD of which is a potential or likely user of the core services. 'Other Grant Support' should include infrastructure/services grants (other Centers or CTSA awards), training (such as T or F-awards) grants, and other such grants that support diabetes-related research but would not be direct users of the core services. 

Examples of Tables A.1, A.2 and A.3 are provided at the Diabetes Research Center Resource page https://www.niddk.nih.gov/research-funding/process/apply/funding-mechanisms/p30/diabetes-research-center-application-resources) for applicant assistance with this requirement. 

Biographical Sketches of Center Research Base Investigators: Please title this attachment “Center Member Biographical Sketches.” Provide biographical sketches for all Center members, as defined by the Center within the application, and organize them alphabetically by the last name of the Research Base Investigator, including any affiliated hospitals and proposed partners. . Do not include biographical sketches for Senior/Key Personnel since those are included with the appropriate component of the application and should not be duplicated here.

Description of Center Research Base Investigators: Please title this attachment “Description of Center Research Base Investigators” and organize alphabetically by Center Member (last name). Note: include ONLY those grants awarded, or subcontracted, to support investigators at the applicant institution or consortium, not to support investigators at other locations. Provide a narrative description of ½ page to no more than 1 page per research base investigator. These narratives should include: a) the Center Member’s active grant number(s) and title(s); b) a few descriptive sentences of the investigator’s research projects including how this research fits into the theme(s) of the DRC; and c) brief description regarding what aspect of the investigator’s research justifies the use of Center core facilities

Core Use by Center Members: Please title this attachment “Core Use by Center Members” and organize alphabetically by Center Member (last name). List all Diabetes Research Center Members including Affiliated Institution (if Center includes more than one institution) Membership Category (only if more than one category of Membership is designated by the Center), and for each Center Member indicate those Center Core Facilities that will be used. An example of Table B is provided at the Diabetes Research Center Resource page https://www.niddk.nih.gov/research-funding/process/apply/funding-mechanisms/p30/diabetes-research-center-application-resources for applicant assistance with this requirement.

Center Collaborations: Please title this attachment “Center Collaborations” and organize alphabetically by Center Member (last name, first name). List all Center Members. Provide primary Department Affiliation, keywords for research interests, names of other Center members who are collaborators (through publications, grants or research projects), and the number of collaborative publications (only those relevant to the Diabetes Center). An example of Table C is provided at the Diabetes Research Center Resource page https://www.niddk.nih.gov/research-funding/process/apply/funding-mechanisms/p30/diabetes-research-center-application-resources for applicant assistance with this requirement.

Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives:

• In an "Other Attachment" entitled "Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives," all applicants must include a summary of strategies to advance the scientific and technical merit of the proposed project through expanded inclusivity.
• The PEDP should provide a holistic and integrated view of how enhancing diverse perspectives is viewed and supported throughout the application and can incorporate elements with relevance to any review criteria (significance, investigator(s), innovation, approach, and environment) as appropriate.
• Where possible, applicant(s) should align their description with these required elements within the research strategy sections.
• The PEDP will vary depending on the scientific aims, expertise required, the environment and performance site(s), as well as how the project aims are structured.
• The PEDP may be no more than 1-page in length and should include a timeline and milestones for relevant components that will be considered as part of the review.

Examples of items that advance inclusivity in research and may be part of the PEDP can include, but are not limited to:

• Discussion of engagement with different types of institutions and organizations (e.g., research-intensive, undergraduate-focused, minority-serving, community-based).
• Description of any planned partnerships that may enhance geographic and regional diversity.
• Plan to enhance recruiting of women and individuals from groups historically under-represented in the biomedical, behavioral, and clinical research workforce.
• Proposed monitoring activities to identify and measure PEDP progress benchmarks.
• Plan to utilize the project infrastructure (i.e., research and structure) to support career-enhancing research opportunities for diverse junior, early- and mid-career researchers.
• Description of any training and/or mentoring opportunities available to encourage participation of students, postdoctoral researchers and co-investigators from diverse backgrounds.
• Plan to develop trans-disciplinary collaboration(s) that require unique expertise and/or solicit diverse perspectives to address research question(s).
• Publication plan that enumerates planned manuscripts and proposed lead authorship.
• Outreach and planned engagement activities to enhance recruitment of individuals from diverse groups as research participants including those from under-represented backgrounds.

For further information on the Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives (PEDP), please see https://braininitiative.nih.gov/about/plan-enhancing-diverse-perspectives-pedp

The following "Other Attachment" is optional for the Overall Component. The filename provided for the attachment will be the name used for the bookmark in the application image. The attachment must be in .pdf format.

Optional: Please title this attachment "Relation to Overall Center". Provide Charts and Tables, such as an organizational chart(s) to illustrate the structure, interactions, and leaders of the institution and Diabetes Research Center.

Project/Performance Site Locations (Overall)

Enter primary site only.

A summary of Project/Performance Sites in the Overall section of the assembled application image in eRA Commons compiled from data collected in the other components will be generated upon submission.

Research and Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Overall)

Include only the Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) and any multi-PDs/PIs (if applicable to this NOFO) for the entire application.

A summary of Senior/Key Persons followed by their Biographical Sketches in the Overall section of the assembled application image in eRA Commons will be generated upon submission.

Budget (Overall)

The only budget information included in the Overall component is the Estimated Project Funding section of the SF424 (R&R) Cover.

A budget summary in the Overall section of the assembled application image in eRA Commons compiled from detailed budget data collected in the other components will be generated upon submission.

PHS 398 Research Plan (Overall)

Introduction to Application: For Resubmission applications, an Introduction to Application is required in the Overall component.

Specific Aims: Describe the broad, long-term objectives of the proposed Diabetes Research Center as well as the central theme(s). The theme may be broad or focused, depending on the goals of the Center. It is recommended that Center applicants subdivide the research base into areas of research emphasis or central research themes that link Center members and their research programs. Discuss the need for a Center to support the investigators in the research base. Include the number of Center members and the overall direct costs present in the research base. Provide a brief overview of the research base as it relates to the theme(s) of the Center. Outline the existing skills and technologies available in the research base as well as other resources at the institution(s). Summarize how the Center will: 1) enhance ongoing projects, 2) assist in the development of new projects, 3) respond to future opportunities, and 4) promote collaborations leading to advances in diabetes, endocrine and metabolic diseases.

Research Strategy: The Research Strategy should include the following sections.

Research Base: The DRC provides a mechanism for fostering interdisciplinary cooperation within a group of established investigators conducting high quality research on diabetes and related areas of endocrinology and metabolic diseases. Therefore, applicants should demonstrate the existence of a strong, substantial research base in diabetes, its complications, and in related research in endocrine and metabolic diseases, and how that research base will benefit from the establishment of a new, or continuation of an existing, Diabetes Research Center.

Applicants should include an overview of current research in diabetes, its complications, and related areas being conducted at their institution in sufficient detail to allow reviewers to judge its extent and the interrelationship of ongoing research. The research of each DRC member should be discussed, and interrelationships of research being conducted by the members should be highlighted. Since most, if not all, of the research base will have undergone separate peer review, the quality of the individual funded projects is already established. Therefore, applicants should specifically address the following: (a) interactions and interrelationships of the research efforts as well as relevance to the theme of the DRC; (b) uses and benefits of core services; (c) plans to develop productive collaborations among Center investigators; and (d) willingness of Center investigators to contribute to the overall objectives of the DRC. Applicants should indicate how the establishment or continuation of a Center will provide added dimensions, such as greater focus and increased cooperation, communication and collaboration that would not likely occur without Center resources.

Collaborative activities with individuals outside of the applicant institution/consortium or between DRCs is encouraged and how any collaboration(s) benefits the research base should be described. Examples of benefits include: 1) more efficient use of resources by cooperating across DRC; 2) an augmented enrichment program; 3) enhanced quality/impact of the DRC's scientific output; and 4) incorporation of additional perspectives, increased productivity, or peer-reviewed funding arising directly from the collaboration.

Membership: A high level of integration and close collaboration among Center personnel from diverse scientific disciplines is an important feature of a successful Diabetes Research Center. Accordingly, the applicant should clearly state considerations for Center membership with specific reference to the potential of members to form interactive, collaborative and synergistic relationships. Criteria for becoming a Diabetes Research Center ‘member’ should be clearly defined. Specific membership criteria, and any affiliation categories (if applicable), should be clearly defined with the goal to better organize and facilitate the focus of the Center’s mission. Subsets of members based on their degree of participation or other quantitative measures are acceptable. Applicants should provide clear guidelines for a) how Center membership(s) is (are) defined; b) the application and selection processes for Center membership; c) the obligations of Center membership; and d) the criteria for termination of membership. Suitable criteria include, but are not limited to, peer-reviewed independent funding, participation in diabetes-related research, and the need for the use of core facilities. All research base investigators should be Center members. Designation as a Center member without the need for the use of core facilities must be well-justified.

Center Organization: Summarize the services, resources, and expertise provided by the proposed Biomedical Research Cores, emphasizing the support they will provide for the thematic areas of the research base. Point out novel services and resources available in the cores and describe the potential for interdisciplinary collaborations among Center Investigators. 

Indicate if any of the proposed Cores will utilize or expand Cores already existing at the institution. Describe how the proposed Center will leverage existing resources and fill gaps in the services available. Leveraging existing resources is encouraged, particularly when this provides a range of services or efficiency that would not otherwise be available. For a Biomedical Research Core that by its nature is not innovative, describe how it is essential to advance the field. 

Provide a plan to determine the need for new services or instrumentation of the DRC members. Discuss how the Center will ensure that Center members are able to take advantage of cutting-edge technology and how services no longer required, or no longer cost-effective, will be phased out. 

Include information on the process of re-evaluating the needs of Center members and how evolving needs will be met.

Also describe how the Center will enhance the research base and foster the careers of its junior investigators through enrichment and mentoring activities and the use of Core services/expertise.

Synergy: Collaborative activities between and among established DRCs, with other NIDDK-funded Center programs, as well as with individuals outside the applicant institution/consortium are strongly encouraged. A mechanism to increase collaborative interactions among DRCs should be described to leverage and build on expertise across the DRC programs. Describe efforts to support regular interactions among DRC Directors and members (e.g. at a regional level); as well as potential sharing of Biomedical Cores. Discuss mechanisms to collaborate with other NIDDK-funded Centers (e.g. NORCs, DDRCCs). Outline steps the Diabetes Research Center will take to promote interdisciplinary studies and collaborations, especially among basic scientists and clinical researchers. For example, when appropriate, DRCs should establish effective synergies with other NIDDK Center programs that conduct translation research, such as the CDTRs, CTSAs and Institutional Development Awards (IDeA) Networks for Clinical and Translational Research. Describe how these collaborations benefit the research base. Examples of benefits include more efficient use of resources by cooperating across DRCs, an augmented enrichment program, enhanced quality/impact of the DRC's scientific output, incorporation of additional perspectives, increased productivity, or peer-reviewed funding arising directly from the collaboration. Applicants are strongly encouraged to suggest coordinated efforts, such as enrichment programs or pilot and feasibility programs. Other NIH-supported Centers and associated cores at the institution should be identified, and assurances provided that overlap or redundancy in Center activities will be avoided unless expressly required to fulfill the mission of the Diabetes Research Center.

Workforce development: Describe how the Center will enhance the research base and foster the careers of its junior investigators through enrichment activities and the use of Core services/expertise. While funding of P&F awards for early-stage/new investigators is important, providing high-quality focused mentorship of ESIs and NIs should also be a priority. A plan for developing and supporting physician-scientists who will pursue diabetes research should be addressed. Criteria and benchmarks for successful mentoring programs, as well as evidence of protected time for early-stage physician scientists should be supported. DRCs are encouraged to link in to available NIDDK-supported mentoring programs such as: CMIER (Center for Improvement of Mentored Experiences in Research (https://cimerproject.org); National NIH K12 DiabDocs program (https://med.stanford.edu/pedsendo/physician-scientist-diabdocs-k12-program.html#about_us); Bringing Resources to Increase Diversity, Growth, Equity, & Scholarship for Obesity, Nutrition, & Diabetes Research (BRIDGES) Consortium https://www.niddk.nih.gov/research-funding/research-programs/diversity-programs/bridges-consortium; and Network of Minority Health Research Investigators (NMRI) at https://www.niddk.nih.gov/research-funding/research-programs/diversity-programs/network-minority-health-research-investigators-nmri. 

Institutional commitment: Applicant institutions/consortia are expected to have demonstrable commitment to the Center's success. Examples of ways institutional commitment might be evidenced include but are not limited to: a) financial support for Cores or other Center functions; b) salary support for Center staff; c) protected time for emerging physicians; d) protected time (in-kind support) for mentoring activities; e) dedicated space and/or availability of equipment. New applications should briefly describe plans for institutional commitment should the Center receive NIDDK support. Renewal applications should briefly describe both previous and ongoing instances of institutional commitment, especially important for Centers that have been supported by NIDDK over a long period of time. Institutional support should be accompanied by letters of support from institutional officials verifying the commitment with specific details. 

For new applications: Emphasize the anticipated impact of the establishment of a DRC on the research base. Include an indication of how the establishment of the Center will provide added dimensions and new opportunities for Diabetes and related research, along with increased cooperation, communication, and collaboration among investigators.

For renewal applications: Briefly, describe the progress and accomplishments of the Center (and its research base) in the preceding project period and how it intends to build upon its successes. Describe the development of multidisciplinary, collaborative, and cooperative interrelationships among Center members; and indicate any alteration in the original Center design that was instigated to meet the evolving needs of the research base. Discuss changes to the research base over the past five years to either facilitate growth or to enhance its focus instead of emphasizing growth. This should be described in a narrative fashion. Since one of the objectives of the Center is to extend research relevant to diabetes, new areas of research and acquisition of new funding should be highlighted in the overview.

Progress Report Publication List (renewal applications only): In this attachment, list the titles and complete references to all appropriate publications and manuscripts accepted for publication, that have resulted from the project since it was last reviewed competitively. Identify the core(s) utilized in association with the publication. Table F is provided for applicant assistance with documenting the contribution of individual cores to peer-reviewed publications by the research base. See example on the Diabetes Research Center Resource page. Only list publications once. Within individual biomedical research core descriptions, refer to publications associated with the core by number as listed in the table of publications. Use an asterisk to indicate any publication that fails to cite the Center grant support.

Letters of Support: Include any letters of support for the proposed DRC from appropriate institutional officials. Letters should address the commitment of the parent organization, or any of its partners, to the Diabetes Research Center and its goals. The parent institution is expected to recognize the Diabetes Research Center as a formal organizational component and provide documented evidence of space dedicated to the needs of the Center, protected time to devote to Center activities, staff recruitment, dedicated equipment, or other financial support for the proposed Center. The parent institution should provide assurance of its commitment to continuing support of the Diabetes Research Center in the event of a change in directorship and a well-defined plan for this eventuality should be in place. In addition, it is expected that the Institution will support the goal of providing to Center members priority access to Institution’s and Center’s facilities and services at minimal or reduced cost. Both the institution and pertinent departments must show a strong commitment to supporting the Center.

If collaborative linkages are being developed between the Diabetes Research Center and the local CTSA staff and/or research personnel, a letter of agreement from the CTSA PD(s)/PI(s) should be included. For any collaborative linkages between the CTSA and a specific Biomedical Research Core, the letter of support should be included within the specific Biomedical Research Core component of the application.

Resource Sharing Plan:
Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the How to Apply - Application Guide.

The following modifications also apply:

Generally, Resource Sharing Plans are expected, but they are not applicable for this component.

Other Plan(s): 

All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:

• All applicants planning research (funded or conducted in whole or in part by NIH) that results in the generation of scientific data are required to comply with the instructions for the Data Management and Sharing Plan. All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, must address a Data Management and Sharing Plan.

Appendix:

Only limited items are allowed in the Appendix. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in How to Apply- Application Guide; any instructions provided here are in addition to the How to Apply - Application Guide instructions.

PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information (Overall)

When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the How to Apply - Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:

If you answered “Yes” to the question “Are Human Subjects Involved?” on the R&R Other Project Information form, there must be at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or a Delayed Onset Study record within the application. The study record(s) must be included in the component(s) where the work is being done, unless the same study spans multiple components. To avoid the creation of duplicate study records, a single study record with sufficient information for all involved components must be included in the Overall component when the same study spans multiple components.

Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information

All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.

Delayed Onset Study

Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start). All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.

PHS Assignment Request Form (Overall)

All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.

Administrative Core

 When preparing your application, use Component Type ‘Admin Core.’

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.

SF424 (R&R) Cover (Administrative Core)

Complete only the following fields:

• Applicant Information
• Type of Applicant (optional)
• Descriptive Title of Applicant’s Project
• Proposed Project Start/Ending Dates

PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement (Administrative Core)

Enter Human Embryonic Stem Cells in each relevant component.

Research & Related Other Project Information (Administrative Core)

Human Subjects: Answer only the ‘Are Human Subjects Involved?’ and 'Is the Project Exempt from Federal regulations?’ questions.

Vertebrate Animals: Answer only the ‘Are Vertebrate Animals Used?’ question.

Project Narrative: Do not complete. Note: ASSIST screens will show an asterisk for this attachment indicating it is required. However, eRA systems only enforce this requirement in the Overall component and applications will not receive an error if omitted in other components.

Other Attachments (renewal applications only; optional): Additional information related to the Center supported Enrichment Program activities, such as agendas/announcements for Diabetes Research Center retreats, symposia, workshops, meetings, specialized courses, seminar series, etc., illustrating the interactions among Center members and other investigators, as well as other educational opportunities may be included in the application. This should be uploaded as a file in .pdf format titled "Enrichment Program".
 

Project /Performance Site Location(s) (Administrative Core)

List all performance sites that apply to the specific component.

Note: The Project Performance Site form allows up to 300 sites, prior to using additional attachment for additional entries.

Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Administrative Core)

• In the Project Director/Principal Investigator section of the form, use Project Role of ‘Other’ with Category of ‘Center Director’ and provide a valid eRA Commons ID in the Credential field. The Center Director should be an experienced and respected scientist with a proven track record for obtaining NIH funding. She/he must be able to coordinate, integrate, and provide guidance in the establishment of new programs in diabetes and related research.
• In the additional Senior/Key Profiles section, list Senior/Key persons that are working in the component.
• Include a single Biographical Sketch for each Senior/Key person listed in the application regardless of the number of components in which they participate. When a Senior/Key person is listed in multiple components, the Biographical Sketch can be included in any one component.
• If more than 100 Senior/Key persons are included in a component, the Additional Senior Key Person attachments should be used. 
• In this component, also provide biographical sketches for any consultants. For renewal applications only, provide biographical sketches for the members of the External Advisory Committee. In the additional Senior/Key Profiles section, list those Senior/Key persons in the Project Role of "Other" with Category of "Consultant" or "Advisory Committee." New applications should NOT contact potential External Advisory Committee (EAC) members nor provide names or biographical sketches for EAC members. New applications may include the expertise or experience needed and the process by which members of an External Advisory Committee by which they will be selected in the Research Strategy.

Budget (Administrative Core)

Budget forms appropriate for the specific component will be included in the application package.

Personnel: The Center Director must devote a minimum of 2.4 person months to the Center, and at least 1.2 of those months must be within the Administrative Core to ensure adequate oversight of the Center. If a multiple-PD/PI application, the combined effort of the PD(s)/PI(s) must be 2.4 person months. Most Centers find that the size and complexity of a Diabetes Research Center warrant inclusion of a program administrator, so salary support for this individual should be included in the Administrative Core. 

The Enrichment Program Director must devote a minimum of 0.6 person months to ensure adequate oversight of the Program. The salary amount charged to the Diabetes Research Center grant must be commensurate with the time spent on Program activities and is subject to institutional and NIH salary policies.

Where possible and applicable, Diabetes Research Centers are encouraged to leverage administrative resources in other NIH funded centers (e.g. Centers for Diabetes Translation Research, Nutrition Obesity Research Centers, and Clinical and Translational Science Awards) to maximize efficiency of resources.

Equipment: If pieces of specialized equipment, or computers, costing more than $5,000 are requested, the application must identify similar equipment already available within the institution and provide a clear justification for purchase based on core service provided to Diabetes Research Center investigators. Requests for general-purpose equipment should be included only after ascertaining the availability of such ​​items within the institution. Justify the request based on this availability. Equipment may only be requested in the initial budget period.

Travel: Include the costs of domestic and foreign travel only if the travel is directly related to the activities of the Diabetes Research Center. Include travel costs for the Center Director, Associate Director, and others as appropriate (i.e. Core Directors) to attend the Diabetes Research Center Directors' meetings held every 12-18 months. Funds for supporting regional Center meetings, if appropriate, may be requested.

Supplies: Consumable supplies directly related to the operational aspects of the Administrative Core facilities are an allowable expense.

Consultants: Include costs associated with consultants (consultant fees, per diem, teleconferences and travel) when their services are required by the Diabetes Research Center, such as the members of the External Advisory Board.

Alterations and Renovations: Funds for the alteration and renovation of an existing structure to provide suitable space for core facilities may be requested. ‘Cosmetic’ renovations are not appropriate.

PEDP Implementation Costs: Applicants may include allowable costs associated with PEDP implementation (as outlined in the Grants Policy Statement Section 7: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps/html5/section_7/7.1_general.htm).

Other Expenses: Funds for development/maintenance of the Center's institutional Diabetes Research Center website may be requested. Include funds to support Enrichment Program activities such as workshops, research fora, symposia, Center retreats and seminar series. Funds for Enrichment Program associated activities such as the printing and distribution/mailing of brochures, programs, and meeting materials, as well as posters and other advertisement materials, may be requested.

Note: The R&R Budget form included in many of the component types allows for up to 100 Senior/Key Persons in section A and 100 Equipment Items in section C prior to using attachments for additional entries. All other SF424 (R&R) instructions apply.
 

PHS 398 Research Plan (Administrative Core) 

Introduction to Application: For Resubmission applications, an Introduction to Application is allowed for each component.

Specific Aims: Clearly state how the Administrative Core will contribute to the goals of the Center and outline interactions of the Administrative Core with each of the other Cores and Programs (P&F and Enrichment). Provide an overview of how the Administrative Core will set the overall direction of the Center and ensure optimal utilization of Center resources.

Research Strategy: The Administrative Core is key to the coordination and functioning of the Center. Administration of the Center will involve the interaction of broad and diverse elements; thus, lines of authority and approval by the appropriate institutional officials must be clearly specified.

The relationship of the DRC to the institution and the reporting lines of the DRC Director to appropriate institutional officials may be presented in diagrammatic form, but also provide a brief explanation in narrative form.

Describe how the Administrative Core will take a leadership role in ensuring the synthesis of findings and activities from research projects and cores towards solving the central problem proposed by the Center. Direct lines of communication between the Administrative Core (including Enrichment Program), Biomedical Research Cores, and the P&F Program should be delineated, as all cores and programs serve critical roles for Center integration.

The Director, who is the PD(s)/PI(s) of the application, should be assisted by one or more Associate Directors who will be involved in the administrative, scientific, or enrichment efforts of the Center and who will serve as Acting Center Director in the absence of the Director. Include a brief narrative describing the qualifications of the Director and Associate Director(s). Describe the process in place to recommend a successor to the Director if a successor becomes necessary.

Include a description of the mechanism for monitoring budgetary overlap between the research projects included in the research base and the funds for the core facilities of the DRC, describing a mechanism to monitor the budgetary adjustments made necessary by usage of Core services. This will ensure that DRC investigators using Cores are able to provide a satisfactory explanation of their relationship to the DRC and their inclusion of charge-back fees for Core use in their individual grant budgets.

It is expected that organization of the Administrative Core will provide a supportive structure able to ensure accomplishment of the following:

• Coordination and integration of Diabetes Research Center components and activities.
• Interactions with the administrative and scientific leadership at the applicant institution(s) to enhance the visibility and effectiveness of the Center as a focus for diabetes research.
• Interactions with other Diabetes Research Centers, other NIH-supported centers, other NIDDK-supported centers, and other appropriate individuals, groups, or organizations.
• Assessment of productivity, effectiveness, and appropriateness of Diabetes Research Center activities, including utilization and quality of core resources.
• Determination of Diabetes Research Center membership, assessment of scientific opportunities, and areas for collaboration among Diabetes Research Center members.
• Organization of Diabetes Research Center Enrichment Program as well as activities such as retreats, invitation of consultants, meetings, and focus groups.
• Recordkeeping of meeting minutes and measures of success including use of Diabetes Research Center facilities, publications, pilot and feasibility awards, and new grant applications resulting from preliminary data enabled by the Diabetes Research Center.
• Maintenance of a Center website, with the administrative core taking primary responsibility for its curation and oversight and for ensuring proper and seamless integration of the Center website with the NIDDK Diabetes Research Center program website.

Center Evolution: Applicants must document policies and procedures for ensuring continuing evolution of Center activities, such as core services, in response to changing needs of the research base. New technologies or services might appear that should be supported, existing technologies might become less important, or economic changes might obviate the need for core services, such as the availability of cost-effective commercial services or core services provided by the research institution. Centers should address the issue of allocation of resources to development of new technologies versus provision of services with existing technologies.
 

Organization of the External and Internal Advisory Committees: The administrative structure must include an Internal Advisory Committee (IAC) and an External Advisory Committee (EAC). New applications should neither contact potential EAC members nor list members of the EAC, but they should describe what expertise is needed and the process by which members will be selected. Renewal applications should provide information on membership of the IAC/EAC and must document the functions and effectiveness of the External and Internal Advisory Committees.

Center Structure: The final administrative structure of the Center will be left largely to the discretion of the applicant institution. However, experience has demonstrated that the effective development of the Center programs requires close interaction between the Center director, Core/Program Leaders, appropriate institutional administrative personnel, and the members of the community in which the Center is located. Therefore, each Center applicant should establish an administrative structure that will permit the development of such interactions. Within this structure, each applicant institution must also establish a mechanism to oversee the use of funds for the proposed pilot and feasibility program. This mechanism must include the use of appropriate consultants for review from the scientific community outside the Center institution. These same consultants may be utilized, if desired, for review of other activities of the Center.

Enrichment Program: The Diabetes Research Center must provide support for enrichment activities to foster multidisciplinary approaches to diabetes research and to attract new investigators or investigators with relevant expertise to diabetes research. While many of these activities occur at the grantee institution, applicants are encouraged to suggest coordinated efforts, such as educational activities, that might operate on a regional or national level and involve multiple Diabetes Research Centers. The Diabetes Research Center enrichment program should be designed to build a community of researchers in diabetes, endocrinology and metabolic disease and promoting scientific exchange among investigators with research interests in these topic areas. The program should also enhance interactions between diabetes researchers and investigators from other fields with relevant expertise. The enrichment program can support activities such as seminars, guest speakers, visiting scientists, consultants, and workshops.

Educational Opportunities: Applicants should describe any educational opportunities afforded by the Diabetes Center for Center participants, and document ways the Center may facilitate, enhance or foster the institutional educational environment. Specifically, Center applicants should provide information on diabetes-related NIDDK or other NIH Institute T32 or K12 programs at the Center institution(s) and describe how the Diabetes Center will help to integrate, facilitate, and enhance activities of T32-supported trainees or K12/KL2-supported scholars. Training of pre- and post-doctorates to conduct research in diabetes is an associated activity of a Center. While direct funding for graduate students and post-doctorates cannot be provided by the Center, the establishment of a Center should provide an enhanced environment for educational, mentoring, and enrichment opportunities. Funding for graduate students and post-doctorates should be sought from NIH NRSA institutional training grants (e.g. T32, T35) and individual fellowships (e.g. F30, F32), and other sources such as private foundations, and commercial companies. 

Interaction with Coordinating Centers: Many NIDDK consortia have coordinating centers as part of their structure, and although NIDDK’s Diabetes Center Program does not currently have a coordinating center, it is anticipated that one may be established within the next 5 years. However, the recently funded National Centers for Metabolic Phenotyping in Live Models of Obesity and Diabetes (MMPC-LIVE) consortia has a coordinating unit (CU) that supports the four Centers for Metabolic Phenotyping of Live Models of Obesity and Diabetes https://www.mmpc.org/. This support includes providing logistical and administrative support, distributing funds, and overseeing financial management of the Vibrant program, providing and maintaining the MMPC-Live website, and promoting the consortium via advertising/outreach. In addition, at the discretion of NIDDK, the CU may also share similar resources with other NIDDK-funded Centers programs (such as the DRCs). For example, the MMPC-Live CU may provide support for funding solicitations and reviews, advertise webinars, develop registration portals for NIDDK workshops and meetings, provide research training support for Medical Students (e.g. Vanderbilt Diabetes Center) and develop software to promote interoperability. The MMPC-Live CU has extensive experience in working with other NIDDK consortia to synergize DRC activities as well as distribute opportunity funds, if available, and when appropriate. Therefore, as a transition until a Diabetes Centers coordinating unit is established, DRC applicants should provide a plan to describe their potential interactions with the MMPC-Live CU as a means of support for P&F programs (e.g. national P&F solicitations), enrichment program support (e.g. announcements, organization etc.), logistical support for workshops, and any other suggested logistical support needs as above.

Medical Student Summer Research Program: Applicants should indicate if they plan to participate in the medical student summer research program that is currently organized through the Diabetes Research Centers program https://www.vumc.org/niddk/welcome. For those Centers that have participated in this program in the past, a brief report should be provided in the application.

Letters of Support: A letter(s) from the PD/PI of any related NIDDK-funded T32 and/or T35 institutional training grant(s) at the Center institution should be included that acknowledges and details how the PD/PI of the T32 or T35 training grant intends to promote cohesive interactions between the two programs. Such letters should also briefly describe how any short-term (e.g. summer) medical student research programs, supported by NIDDK-funded T32 or T35 training grants, coordinate with Center activities related to the proposed Enrichment Program. Include any other letters of support for the proposed Core, as appropriate.
 

Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following modification: Generally, Resource Sharing Plans are expected, but they are not applicable for this component.

Appendix:

Only limited items are allowed in the Appendix.  Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide; any instructions provided here are in addition to the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide instructions.

PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information (Administrative Core)

When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:

If you answered “Yes” to the question “Are Human Subjects Involved?” on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or a Delayed Onset Study record.
 

Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed
 

Delayed Onset Study

Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start). All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed. Applicants should provide institutional plans and procedures to assure compliance with applicable federal regulations and NIH policies for the protection of human research participants, including the evaluation of risks and protections in project proposals, appropriate ethical oversight of funded projects, and plans for monitoring data and safety in clinical research projects.
 

Biomedical Research Core

When preparing your application, use Component Type 'Core'.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.

SF424 (R&R) Cover (Biomedical Research Core)

Complete only the following fields:

• Applicant Information
• Type of Applicant (optional)
• Descriptive Title of Applicant’s Project
• Proposed Project Start/Ending Dates

PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement (Biomedical Research Core)

Enter Human Embryonic Stem Cells in each relevant component.

Research & Related Other Project Information (Biomedical Research Core)

Human Subjects: Answer only the ‘Are Human Subjects Involved?’ and 'Is the Project Exempt from Federal regulations?’ questions.
Vertebrate Animals: Answer only the ‘Are Vertebrate Animals Used?’ question

Project Narrative: Do not complete. Note: ASSIST screens will show an asterisk for this attachment indicating it is required. However, eRA systems only enforce this requirement in the Overall component and applications will not receive an error if omitted in other components.

Facilities and Other Resources: The description of the physical arrangements and instrumentation for the cores should be given special attention. Arrangements for enough space for core activities or for access to appropriate established facilities must be made. Centers are strongly encouraged to enter into cooperative arrangements with cores already established within their institution, or with other Centers in close proximity, when the existing cores offer the services needed. These arrangements are important whenever greater efficiency or cost savings can be realized by such an agreement. When proposing the use of a shared facility, details about access, fee-schedules, and prioritization of Center members' use of the shared facility must be described. It may be advantageous for a Diabetes Research Center to provide support for appropriate personnel to work specifically for Center members in an existing facility/core (e.g., metabolomics core) at the institution. In that case, the designated Diabetes Research Center Core Director must work closely with the parent facility Core Director to coordinate services, unless the same individual assumes both roles.
 

Other Attachments: The following attachment should be included in /pdf format. The filename provided for the attachment will be the name used for the bookmark in the application image.

Core Facility Use: Please title this attachment "Core Facility Use" and indicate the Core User, Funded Project that supports the Core use, Period of Core Use, services used, and estimated use and comments. Table D is provided for applicant assistance at the Diabetes Research Center Resource page https://www.niddk.nih.gov/research-funding/process/apply/funding-mechanisms/p30/diabetes-research-center-application-resources 

Project/Performance Site Locations (Biomedical Research Core)

List all performance sites that do not apply to the specific component.

Note: The Performance Site form allows up to 300 sites, prior to using additional attachment for additional entries

Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Biomedical Research Core)

• In the Project Director/Principal Investigator section of the form, use Project Role of ‘Other’ with Category of ‘Core Director’ and provide a valid eRA Commons ID in the Credential field. Core Directors may be investigators that have independently funded research programs that will use the core services; or be investigators whose major role is director of the core.
• In the additional Senior/Key Profiles section, list Senior/Key persons that are working in the component. Biosketches should be provided for critical core staff, such as longtime lab managers or those with essential unique expertise.
• Include a single Biographical Sketch for each Senior/Key person listed in the application regardless of the number of components in which they participate. When a Senior/Key person is listed in multiple components, the Biographical Sketch can be included in any one component.
• If more than 100 Senior/Key persons are included in a component, the Additional Senior Key Person attachments should be used.
• Where appropriate, an established expert in the core activities may also be included as a consultant to the core.

Budget (Biomedical Research Core)

Budget forms appropriate for the specific component will be included in the application package.

Personnel: This category should include salary support for key personnel, including the Core Director, co-Director, and other professional and technical personnel. The Core Director must devote a minimum of 1-person month to the Core to ensure adequate oversight. If there is more than one core director, the minimum effort of each is 0.6 person months. The salary amount charged to the Diabetes Research Center grant must be commensurate with the time spent on Core activities and is subject to institutional and NIH salary policies. A Core Director with requisite expertise may devote a greater effort to the core, and with exceptionally strong justification could devote up to 12 person months. Salary support for technicians and other core personnel are allowable in accordance with the volume and type of work in the core. Stipends for research trainees are not available through the Center. Such funding must be sought through other grant mechanisms.

Equipment: If specialized equipment costing more than $5,000 per piece is requested, the application must identify similar equipment already available within the institution and provide a clear justification for purchase based on core service provided to Diabetes Research Center investigators.

Requests for general-purpose equipment should be included only after ascertaining the availability of such items within the institution. Justify the request based on this availability. Equipment may only be requested in the initial year of the proposed project period.

Travel: If well-justified and related directly to Core activities/functions, limited travel funds for Core professional staff may be requested to support domestic or foreign travel.

Supplies: Consumable supplies directly related to the operational aspects of the Diabetes Research Center core facilities are an allowable expense. This includes office materials as well as laboratory supplies. The supply budgets of separately funded individual research projects must be appropriately reduced to reflect such support, thus eliminating duplication.
 

Research Patient Care Costs: Research patient care costs (both in-patient and out-patient) are an allowable expense. Attempts should be made to utilize existing clinical facilities, such as those supported by Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs) and individually supported beds. If the CTSA is to be used, include a letter of agreement from the PD/PI of the CTSA; such a letter (in .pdf format) may be attached as a 'Letter of support' for the appropriate Biomedical Research Core(s).

Request costs relating to the clinical research efforts of Diabetes Research Center investigators ONLY if there is no overlap with other funding. Costs already budgeted in individual projects should be appropriately reduced if such costs are to be transferred to the Center. The Diabetes Research Center is not intended to be a facility for health care delivery. Thus, only those patient costs directly related to research activities may be charged to the Center.
 

Other Expenses: Funds for equipment maintenance/service contracts may be requested but should reflect only an equivalent percentage of the service contract based on the overall use of the specified equipment by Center investigators versus other users. The budget justification for any maintenance/service contracts should document usage of the equipment by Center members. Only in very rare cases should full support for a maintenance/service contract be requested, and strong justification must be provided if much of the core budget is in this category. 

Alterations and Renovations: Funds for the alteration and renovation of an existing structure to provide suitable space for core facilities may be requested. ‘Cosmetic’ renovations are not appropriate.
 

Consultants: Include costs associated with consultants (e.g. consultant fees, per diem, teleconferences, and travel) when their services are required by the core.
 

Budget requests for a Regional/National Shared Resource Core that is located outside of the applicant institution must be carefully documented and justified and should be dedicated solely to expanding core services to investigators outside of the parent institution or an affiliated hospital. 
 

Note: The R&R Budget form included in many of the component types allows for up to 100 Senior/Key Persons in section A and 100 Equipment Items in section C prior to using attachments for additional entries. All other SF424 (R&R) instructions apply

PHS 398 Research Plan (Biomedical Research Core)

Introduction to Application: For Resubmission applications, an Introduction to Application is allowed for each component.

Specific Aims: Clearly state the aims of the Biomedical Research Core

Research Strategy: A biomedical research core is a shared facility that provides a needed service to DRC investigators enabling them to conduct their funded individual research projects more efficiently and/or more effectively. Provide the rationale for establishing or continuing the Core and the activities of the Core. The description of each Core should indicate how it will support the Center’s research base in a cost-effective manner.

Include a definition of qualified users and provide a list of research base investigators who will use the core, including the expected extent of their proposed use. Each proposed Core must be utilized by a minimum of two federally funded investigators who are DRC members. Emphasize the anticipated benefits that investigators will derive from using core facilities. Criteria for use and for prioritization must be included in the application.

Present the organization and proposed mode of operation of each core. As appropriate to the core, a charge-back system may be developed to allow investigators to utilize its services. Financial justification such as comparative costs of other sources of proposed core services as well as plans for cost recovery, i.e. charge-back fees, from users should be detailed.

Charge-back fees are allowable budgetary items in the investigators' individual research project grants. A system of payment management/accounting must be established such that it is clear to the individual users, the institutional business office, and the NIDDK what the charge-back system covers and how funds recovered are being used. This will enable Center investigators to appropriately adjust the budgets on their own grants and ensure accountability.

Each Core must have an operational plan including methods to:

• Assure quality control (especially important for cores with multiple services)
• Prioritize investigator use (especially important for institutional cores)
• Monitor core use
• Adapt to new technology and ongoing needs of DRC members
• Manage core services that are offered at more than one location

Limited use of cores by investigators in other fields who are not DRC members is encouraged, as is use by trainees, students, and junior faculty, but rules to regulate this use should be defined. If the core supports user training, the approach to and extent of training being performed in the Core should be detailed. User training is an appropriate and worthwhile activity of a Core and is encouraged.

Any Core with a relatively limited number of users must develop plans to broaden the number of Core users. If applicable, include a plan for promoting new cores to DRC members. Such plans are particularly important for any Core that, while not extensively used, is considered essential by the Center administration.

Limited developmental research is also an appropriate function of a core facility. Such activities, however, must be directly related to enhancing the function or utility of the Core.

DRCs are strongly encouraged to establish cooperative arrangements with established cores at the applicant institution or at other DRCs offering a similar type of service. Describe the nature of any cooperative arrangements, access, fee-schedules, the prioritization plan, and the methods to monitor use under these circumstances.

It may be advantageous for a DRC to provide support for appropriate personnel to work specifically for DRC members in an existing facility/core (e.g., transgenic animal core) at the institution. In this case, the designated DRC Core Director must work closely with the parent facility Core Director to coordinate services, unless the same individual assumes both roles. These arrangements are important whenever greater efficiency or cost savings can be realized by such an agreement. Therefore, financial justification such as comparative costs of other sources of proposed core services as well as plans for cost recovery from users should be detailed.

Because cooperation between DRCs is also encouraged, but not required, any plans to work with one or more other established DRCs may be provided and documented along with a description of the benefit(s) to the DRC being proposed. Benefits might include, but are not limited to, cost savings, ability to provide additional or improved services, or enhanced productivity by Center members. ​​​​​Likewise, collaborations with other Core Centers supported by other NIDDK Center Programs are also encouraged and may also be documented and described.

Institutional Core: A proposed DRC core may be an institutionally shared research core. In those cases, applicants must provide a rationale for using institutional cores, such as:

• Support for the existing resource through the DRC will provide added value and access to the resource beyond that which would be provided by paying for the use of the resource through a fee-for-service process;
• The institutional/departmental core represents a unique resource which would not otherwise be available to Center members (e.g., is too costly, too labor-intensive, or too specialized);
• The institutional/departmental core provides a service done more effectively (i.e., more inexpensively or by specially trained personnel or requiring specialized facilities) than would be feasible in individual cores (e.g. histology, animal models), and thus using the institutional/shared core avoids duplication and lowers costs for DRC members; and/or
• The service/instrumentation/expertise in the centralized core can only exist with the participation of multiple centers and their user fees, and DRC members need the service/instrumentation/expertise in proportion to the buy-in from the DRC. 

Applicants should provide details about access and prioritization of Center members to the shared research core(s). Furthermore, documentation that the DRC will have some input to, and oversight of, the shared institutional core with respect to its management, planning for future changes and improvements, etc. should be provided. ​​​​​​​

Regional/National Shared Resource Cores: Applicants requesting a Regional/National Shared Resource Core that is located at a different institution, should document that there is enough demand by the wider scientific community for the expansion (or establishment) of the proposed core services. The research base in diabetes at the institution(s) that would use the regional core(s) should also be documented. Plans for prioritization of research core services, as well as user training to the broader research community, should be provided. ​​​​​​​ 

Program Income: Centers are encouraged, where appropriate, to develop a program income (recharge/ fee-for-service) system for use of core services. Such a program income system would constitute a method of charging core users for their usage of expertise and research resources. Program income must be re-invested into direct support of Center-related activities and/or expenses and may not generate a profit for the Center.

Renewal applications: Information relative to cores in renewal applications should generally cover the same points as initial applications. In addition, past performance and accomplishments should be described and highlighted. The effect of the service provided by a core on investigator productivity and cost-effectiveness should also be addressed. Any changes in services provided should be documented. Any Core usage by (1) Members of other DRCs; (2) Members of other NIDDK-funded Centers; and (3) Non-Center members, both locally and nationally, should be documented. If further funding is not being requested for a Core, include information on past use of the core services, as well as a brief explanation of the reasons for deleting the services, combining facilities, or creating new Cores.

Progress Report Publications List (renewal applications only): Core productivity and accomplishments as demonstrated by peer-reviewed research publications supported by the core should be documented by listing the number(s) of the relevant publication(s) from Table F, which was attached in the “Overall” component. Do not duplicate publication lists for each Biomedical Research Core. Applicants must provide strong justification if the Core Director is author on all, or a majority of, publications that are listed. ​​​​​​​
 

Letters of Support: For any proposed Regional/National Shared Resource Cores, include letters of support from partnering institutions. For any collaborative linkages between the CTSA and a specific Biomedical Research Core, a letter of support should be included within the specific Biomedical Research Core component of the application. Also, provide letters to address the career potential of, and institutional commitment to, junior scientists who serve as core managers/technical directors. In addition, other letters of support for the proposed Core may be included, as appropriate.

Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

Appendix:

Only limited items are allowed in the Appendix. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide; any instructions provided here are in addition to the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide instructions.

PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information (Biomedical Research Core)

When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:

If you answered “Yes” to the question “Are Human Subjects Involved?” on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or a Delayed Onset Study record.

Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed

Delayed Onset Study

Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start). All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

Pilot and Feasibility Program

When preparing your application, use Component Type ‘P&F Program.’

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.

SF424 (R&R) Cover (Pilot and Feasibility Program)

Complete only the following fields:

• Applicant Information
• Type of Applicant (optional)
• Descriptive Title of Applicant’s Project
• Proposed Project Start/Ending Dates

PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement (Pilot and Feasibility Program)

 Enter Human Embryonic Stem Cells in each relevant component.

Research & Related Other Project Information (Pilot and Feasibility Program)

Human Subjects: Answer only the ‘Are Human Subjects Involved?’ and 'Is the Project Exempt from Federal regulations?’ questions.

Vertebrate Animals: Answer only the ‘Are Vertebrate Animals Used?’ question.

Project Narrative: Do not complete. Note: ASSIST screens will show an asterisk for this attachment indicating it is required. However, eRA systems only enforce this requirement in the Overall component and applications will not receive an error if omitted in other components.

Other Attachments: The following attachments should be included to aid in the review of applications. The filename provided for each attachment will be the name used for the bookmark in the application image. All attachments should be in .pdf format. ​​​​​​​

Pilot Project Outcomes (renewal applications only): Please title this attachment "Pilot Project Outcomes" and list all P&F Projects supported in the most recent 5 or, if applicable, 10-year period. Include the years funded, awardee, dates and amount of P&F funding, the title of the project and brief description, P&F award type (i.e. new investigator; established investigator new to diabetes; or development of new technology), numbers of abstracts and publications derived from pilot support, resulting grants funded or pending applications (including grant number/funding agency and project period), and whether the P&F awardee is still involved in diabetes research. Table E is provided as an example at the Diabetes Research Center Resource page https://www.niddk.nih.gov/research-funding/process/apply/funding-mechanisms/p30/diabetes-research-center-application-resources for applicant assistance with this requirement.

Pilot Project Summary/Abstract (for all applications): Please title this attachment "Pilot Project Information" and provide a Project Summary/Abstract for each proposed pilot and feasibility project (including any proposed Core use), as well as the biographical sketch of the investigator for each of the proposed pilot and feasibility projects. For renewal applications, this information should be from the most recent group of funded pilot and feasibility projects. New applications that have made awards through a P&F program that was set up to demonstrate feasibility and/or that is intended to be the basis for a P30 program, may provide information about awards made under those P&F programs.
 

Project /Performance Site Location(s) (Pilot and Feasibility Program)

 List all performance sites that apply to the specific component.

Note: The Project Performance Site form allows up to 300 sites, prior to using additional attachment for additional entries.

Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Pilot and Feasibility Program)

• In the Project Director/Principal Investigator section of the form, use Project Role of ‘Other’ with Category of ‘Project Lead’ and provide a valid eRA Commons ID in the Credential field. The Pilot and Feasibility Program must have a Director who is an established investigator in diabetes research.
• In the additional Senior/Key Profiles section, list Senior/Key persons that are working in the component.
• Include a single Biographical Sketch for each Senior/Key person listed in the application regardless of the number of components in which they participate. When a Senior/Key person is listed in multiple components, the Biographical Sketch can be included in any one component.
• If more than 100 Senior/Key persons are included in a component, the Additional Senior Key Person attachments should be used.
   

Budget (Pilot and Feasibility Program)

Budget forms appropriate for the specific component will be included in the application package.

Personnel: Include salary support for key personnel, including the P&F Program Director, and other professional and administrative personnel. The P&F Program Director, who must have sufficient effort to manage and provide oversight, typically devotes 0.6 to 1 person month. The salary amount charged to the Diabetes Research Center grant must be commensurate with the time spent on P&F Program activities and is subject to institutional and NIH salary policies.

Other Expenses: Include funds to support individual Pilot and Feasibility projects. At least 25% of the overall Center direct costs, exclusive of equipment, should be for support of P&F projects. It is anticipated that up to $50,000 in direct costs per year for up to two years will be provided for most approved P&F projects. Efforts to increase the number of P&F awards and availability of funds for the program through program income or alternative funding sources are particularly encouraged.

Consultants: Include costs associated with consultants (e.g. consultant fees/honoraria, per diem, and teleconferences) when their services are required by the Pilot and Feasibility Program, such as any external reviewers for P&F applications.

Note: The R&R Budget form included in many of the component types allows for up to 100 Senior/Key Persons in section A and 100 Equipment Items in section C prior to using attachments for additional entries. All other SF424 (R&R) instructions apply. 

PHS 398 Research Plan (Pilot and Feasibility Program)

Introduction to Application: For Resubmission applications, an Introduction to Application is allowed for each component.

Specific Aims: Clearly state the aims of the Pilot and Feasibility Program.

Research Strategy: Describe the overall goals and structure of the Pilot and Feasibility Program.

Management of the pilot and feasibility program: A significant responsibility for the management of the P&F program will be left to the Center administration during the project period. Each Center must propose a minimum of 2 pilot and feasibility studies to be supported from NIDDK funds each year. 

P&F award eligibility and related guidelines: All eligible investigators must have faculty appointments and be independent investigators (postdoctoral fellows or their equivalent are not eligible). Investigators eligible for pilot and feasibility funding generally fall into three categories: (1) new investigators without current or past NIH research support as a PD/PI (current or past support from other sources should have been modest); (2) established investigators with no previous work in diabetes who wish to apply their expertise to a problem in this area; (3) investigators developing new research techniques/technologies that could be used in a DRC Core facility. It is expected that most P&F applicants will fall into the first category. Each pilot and feasibility study proposal should clearly state the justification for eligibility of the investigator under one of the above three criteria. Furthermore, the topic of the P&F application should be related to the objectives of the Center.

Pool of applicants: Clearly describe and justify the pool from which potential pilot and feasibility applications will be selected. This can be limited to investigators at the parent institution or expanded to include investigators at institutions with a well-defined affiliation with the Center. Such an affiliation can occur either through a sub-contractual relationship for support of core resources, or through inclusion of funded projects at a collaborating institution in the research base utilizing the shared resources of the Center. The mechanisms by which information on the availability of pilot and feasibility awards will be disseminated and by which applicants will apply and be selected for these awards must be described and will be an important element in the review of the pilot and feasibility component of the Center.

Since pilot and feasibility studies can be awarded for varying periods of time, these studies may end at various times. In addition, the studies may also be terminated by the Center administration before their approved time limit for various reasons, such as: (1) the P&F recipient may receive outside funding for the project; (2) the project was found not to be feasible; (3) the P&F recipient may leave the Center institution; etc. When this occurs, the Center may make new awards for pilot and feasibility studies with the remaining funds.

Requirements: While a Center's administrative framework for management of the pilot and feasibility program is basically left up to each Center (subject to NIH peer review), certain minimal requirements must be met. There must also be a committee representing all the aspects of the Center to assist the P&F Director in the management of the program. The major responsibilities of the P&F Program Director and the committee will be to:

• Prepare and ensure appropriate distribution of the announcement of P&F funding;
• Arrange and preside over the scientific merit review of proposals: a) at least one reviewer from outside the parent institution must be used for each proposal; b) all reviewers should assign impact scores in accordance with the NIH system; and c) copies of all proposals (with written documentation of reviews, impact scores, and final action) must be kept by the Center;
• Develop and maintain a mechanism for the oversight and review of ongoing P&F projects; this is especially important as a requirement for a second year of P&F support;
• Make recommendations regarding termination or other actions to the Center;
• Maintain a record of subsequent career events of each pilot and feasibility study recipient. This record should also be included in Diabetes Research Centers renewal applications when documenting the success of the P&F program. To facilitate maintenance of career records, P&F awardees should be encouraged to obtain ORCID iDs (Open Researcher and Contributor Identifiers).

All applicants should describe how these requirements will be met and have been met in the case of renewal applications. Also included should be an assessment of the relevancy of the individual pilot and feasibility studies to research on diabetes, endocrinology and related metabolic diseases and to the specific goals and objectives of the individual Center and of the Center program generally.

Pilot and feasibility program in new applications: Provide relevant information on proposed P&F projects. These should be the best applications received by the Center and should be reviewed in the manner proposed for all future P&F applications.

Pilot and feasibility program in renewal applications: In general, a renewal application should include: (1) an historical overview; (2) a description of the management of the program; (3) a description of the method for solicitation for pilot and feasibility projects and the number of respondents received for each solicitation; and (4) a statement of the benefits of the program to the Center, as well as the contribution of the uniqueness of the Center environment to the program. Some of these points are detailed in the following paragraphs.

The historical overview should cover the pilot and feasibility program since the inception of the Center. The pilot and feasibility program director may wish to highlight certain P&F projects or aspects of past projects such as research advances, collaborations which resulted in lasting relationships, acquisition of new skills by the study recipient, or other significant outcomes. The relationship of the scope of the various studies to that of the Center should be emphasized.

The description of the management of the program should present in detail the current system used to manage the pilot and feasibility program, including its integration with and relationship to the rest of the administrative structure. The use of outside consultants for review should be included in the discussion. Important features of the solicitation process should be provided including the distribution and the number of respondents.

Mentorship of P&F applicants: While funding support through the P&F program is of obvious importance, also is the mentorship of the candidates, not just those that were successful in obtaining funding, but also those that have submitted but not been successful in obtaining support for a P&F award. Therefore, criteria and benchmarks for successful, high-quality focused mentorship of this group of investigators that are early in their career should be described. Describe planned development of novel approaches and models for mentorship as well as efforts to link with NIDDK-funded networks and mentoring programs such as CMIER (Center for Improvement of Mentored Experiences in Research) (https://cimerproject.org); National NIH K12 DiabDocs program (https://med.stanford.edu/pedsendo/physician-scientist-diabdocs-k12-program.html#about_us); Bringing Resources to Increase Diversity, Growth, Equity, & Scholarship for Obesity, Nutrition, & Diabetes Research (BRIDGES) Consortium https://www.niddk.nih.gov/research-funding/research-programs/diversity-programs/bridges-consortium; and Network of Minority Health Research Investigators (NMRI) at https://www.niddk.nih.gov/research-funding/research-programs/diversity-programs/network-minority-health-research-investigators-nmri. Sharing of these programs between and among DRCs is encouraged. Mechanisms for bringing together P&F awardees (i.e. networking) should also be encouraged and supported. Networking activities could also include avenues for interactions with early-stage investigators from other NIDDK consortia and Centers (e.g. NORCs, CDTRs, DDRCCs, HIRN, dkNET etc.). Opportunities for P&F investigators to present their results as well as critique the results of their peers should be encouraged.

Compliance with NIH regulations: DRCs that fund P&F projects involving Humans Subjects Research must develop a detailed, formal plan for assuring compliance with all relevant NIH regulations. The plans for implementation of this oversight plan must be included in the application, as appropriate for either clinical studies or clinical trials. Do not duplicate information already provided in the PHS Human Subjects Clinical Trial Information form. Plans should include: (1) development and implementation of appropriate data and safety monitoring plans; 2) documentation of IRB approval; 3) if relevant, results reporting in www.clincaltrials.gov; 4) development and monitoring of appropriate milestones; 5) oversight of participant recruitment and retention; and 6) planning for dissemination of research results.

Progress Report Publications List: Productivity and accomplishments of the P&F Program as demonstrated by peer-reviewed research publications supported by the Center should be documented by listing the number(s) of the relevant publication(s) from Table F, which was attached in the Center Overview component. ​​​​​​

Letters of Support: Include any letters of support for the Pilot and Feasibility Program by appropriate institutional officials at partnering organizations (other than the parent institution), if applicable.

Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

Appendix:

Only limited items are allowed in the Appendix. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide; any instructions provided here are in addition to the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide instructions.

PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information (Pilot and Feasibility Program)

When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:

If you answered “Yes” to the question “Are Human Subjects Involved?” on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or a Delayed Onset Study record.

Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

Delayed Onset Study

Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start). All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed. 

3. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)

See Part 2. Section III.1 for information regarding the requirement for obtaining a unique entity identifier and for completing and maintaining active registrations in System for Award Management (SAM), NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code (if applicable), eRA Commons, and Grants.gov

4. Submission Dates and Times

Part I. contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission. When a submission date falls on a weekend or Federal holiday, the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day.

Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies) using ASSIST or other electronic submission systems. Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH’s electronic system for grants administration. NIH and Grants.gov systems check the application against many of the application instructions upon submission. Errors must be corrected and a changed/corrected application must be submitted to Grants.gov on or before the application due date and time. If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late. Applications that miss the due date and time are subjected to the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications.

Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.

Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in How to Apply- Application Guide.

5. Intergovernmental Review (E.O. 12372)

This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.

6. Funding Restrictions

All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 7.9.1 Selected Items of Cost.

7. Other Submission Requirements and Information

Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the How to Apply - Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.

For information on how applications will be automatically assembled for review and funding consideration after submission, refer to: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/ElectronicReceipt/files/Electronic_Multi-project_Application_Image_Assembly.pdf.

Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.

For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit How to Apply - Application Guide. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Dealing with System Issues guidance. For assistance with application submission, contact the Application Submission Contacts in Section VII.

Important reminders:

All PD(s)/PI(s) and component Project Leads must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile form. Failure to register in the Commons and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the successful submission of an electronic application to NIH.

The applicant organization must ensure that the unique entity identifier provided on the application is the same identifier used in the organization’s profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Management. Additional information may be found in How to Apply - Application Guide. 

See more tips for avoiding common errors.

Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with application instructions by the Center for Scientific Review and responsiveness by National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disorders (NIDDK), NIH. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.

Applications must include annual milestones. Applications that fail to include annual milestones will be considered incomplete and will be withdrawn.  Applications must include a PEDP submitted as Other Project Information as an attachment. Applications that fail to include a PEDP will be considered incomplete and will be withdrawn before review.

Use of Common Data Elements in NIH-funded Research

Many NIH ICs encourage the use of common data elements (CDEs) in basic, clinical, and applied research, patient registries, and other human subject research to facilitate broader and more effective use of data and advance research across studies. CDEs are data elements that have been identified and defined for use in multiple data sets across different studies. Use of CDEs can facilitate data sharing and standardization to improve data quality and enable data integration from multiple studies and sources, including electronic health records. NIH ICs have identified CDEs for many clinical domains (e.g., neurological disease), types of studies (e.g. genome-wide association studies (GWAS)), types of outcomes (e.g., patient-reported outcomes), and patient registries (e.g., the Global Rare Diseases Patient Registry and Data Repository). NIH has established a “Common Data Element (CDE) Resource Portal" (https://cde.nlm.nih.gov/home/) to assist investigators in identifying NIH-supported CDEs when developing protocols, case report forms, and other instruments for data collection. The Portal provides guidance about and access to NIH-supported CDE initiatives and other tools and resources for the appropriate use of CDEs and data standards in NIH-funded research. Investigators are encouraged to consult the Portal and describe in their applications any use they will make of NIH-supported CDEs in their projects.

Post Submission Materials

Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy. Any instructions provided here are in addition to the instructions in the policy.

Section V. Application Review Information

1. Criteria

Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. Applications submitted to NIH in support of the NIH mission are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.

For this particular Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), note the following:
Reviewers will be asked to evaluate the following individual sections. The overall impact score is not the average for these components.

• Research Base, including the focus, quality of research, collaborations among members, relevance to the Center's stated theme(s)/area(s) of research focus; and, for renewal applications, the maintenance, growth, re-focusing, or evolution of the research base. The research base of a renewal application is not required to have grown since the previous competing award and may have even decreased. The lack of growth or a slight decrease might be viewed positively when it is the result of a concerted effort to enhance the Center's focus. In other words, there could be instances where other considerations such as increased focus of the research base justify the lack of growth or slight decrease in the size of the base.
• Each Biomedical Research Core, as well as any optional Cores, if requested (Regional/National), including: the potential of the core to empower diabetes research by promoting new research directions and creating diabetes-specific research opportunities that are not available through commercial or institutional resources; the documented need for and use of the proposed services; number of users; qualifications of personnel; management, including prioritization and responsiveness to the needs of the users; quality control management; and any appropriate developmental work.
• Administrative Core, including committee structure, Center membership criteria, Enrichment Program and lines of communication and collaboration within DRCs as well as with other NIDDK-funded programs.
• Pilot and Feasibility Program, as well as the optional national/regional P& F Program, if requested, including the organization of the overall process of solicitation, review, and monitoring of P&F projects, and for renewal applications the quality, appropriateness and outcomes of supported P&F projects.
• Diabetes Research Center Director (PD/PI), including leadership and commitment to the stated goals of the Diabetes Research Center.

Center Pilot and Feasibility Programs have the option to support Clinical Trials.

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials:

A proposed Clinical Trial application may include study design, methods, and intervention that are not by themselves innovative but address important questions or unmet needs. Additionally, the results of the clinical trial may indicate that further clinical development of the intervention is unwarranted or lead to new avenues of scientific investigation.

Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the Center to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the Center proposed).

Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a Center that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.

Significance

Does the Center address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed Center rigorous? If the aims of the Center are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

Specific to this NOFO: What are the strengths of the Center's research base (its breadth and depth)? Is there a scientifically robust research base in diabetes, its complications, and/or related endocrinology and metabolic diseases at the Center? Do the focus, relevance, interrelationships, quality, productivity, and, to some extent, quantity of the research base support the stated theme of the Center? Will the research base investigators benefit from the services/programs supported by the Center? What is the likelihood that the Center will increase efficiency; promote new research directions and meaningful collaborations among Center investigators; facilitate interactions and collaborations among the investigators; and prove cost-effective? If collaborations with other Centers or individuals outside of the research base are described, do they enhance the productivity or quality of the research base; enhance the services offered by the Center; strengthen the Enrichment Program; allow for a more efficient use of the Center's available resources; or otherwise benefit the research base? To what extent do the efforts described in the Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives further the significance of the project?

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials

Are the scientific rationale and need for a clinical trial to test the proposed hypothesis or intervention well supported by preliminary data, clinical and/or preclinical studies, or information in the literature or knowledge of biological mechanisms? For trials focusing on clinical or public health endpoints, is this clinical trial necessary for testing the safety, efficacy or effectiveness of an intervention that could lead to a change in clinical practice, community behaviors or health care policy? For trials focusing on mechanistic, behavioral, physiological, biochemical, or other biomedical endpoints, is this trial needed to advance scientific understanding?

Investigator(s)

Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or those in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?

Specific to this NOFO: How effectively do the Center investigators responsible for the individual research projects interact with each other and contribute to the overall objectives of the DRC? How appropriate are the Center Director’s and Associate Director(s)’ administrative abilities and scientific expertise for effective management of the DRC? How strong is their commitment and their ability to devote adequate time for the effective management of the DRC? How well qualified are the Core Directors, and how appropriate are their scientific expertise and administrative abilities? How well are the P&F candidates prepared to lead their proposed P&F projects effectively? Do they have the appropriate conceptual and technical expertise for executing the proposed research? To what extent will the efforts described in the Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives strengthen and enhance the expertise required for the project?

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials

With regard to the proposed leadership for the project, do the PD/PI(s) and key personnel have the expertise, experience, and ability to organize, manage and implement the proposed clinical trial and meet milestones and timelines? Do they have appropriate expertise in study coordination, data management and statistics? For a multicenter trial, is the organizational structure appropriate and does the application identify a core of potential center investigators and staffing for a coordinating center?

Innovation

Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?

Specific to this NOFO: Do the Cores provide new methods, techniques, and/or resources that are not available through commercial or existing institutional resources? Do the Cores demonstrate the ability to adapt when needed to support investigators in emerging areas of diabetes and its complications, and related areas of endocrinology and metabolism research, as appropriate to the purpose of the Core and the research supported by the Center? Is the selection process by which the individual studies are selected for P&F projects appropriate? Does the Center encourage the development of early career research- and physician-scientists through their P&F program? Does the Center provide evidence of supporting these scientists not only through funds, but by providing mentoring opportunities within the Center but also by taking advantage of NIDDK-supported mentoring activities. To what extent will the efforts described in the Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives meaningfully contribute to innovation?

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials

Does the design/research plan include innovative elements, as appropriate, that enhance its sensitivity, potential for information or potential to advance scientific knowledge or clinical practice?

Approach

Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the Center? Have the investigators included plans to address weaknesses in the rigor of prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed Center? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the Center is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?

If the project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, are the plans to address:

1) the protection of human subjects from research risks, and
2) inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults), justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?

Specific to this NOFO: Are criteria for membership in the Diabetes Research Center clear and appropriate? Is appropriate administrative organization proposed to facilitate coordination of ongoing research between the separately funded projects and establishment and maintenance of internal communication and cooperation among the Center investigators? Are the management capabilities of the Center Director(s) and Administrator(s) clear and appropriate, including: fiscal administration, procurement oversight, property and personnel management, planning, and budgeting? Is there efficient and effective use and/or planned use of enrichment funds, including the contribution of these activities to the stated goals of the Center? Is there discussion of interactions, at a regional or nationally level, with other DRC programs; as well as other NIDDK-funded Centers and programs? Are the timeline and milestones associated with the Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives well-developed and feasible? Will the proposed cores serve the research base, providing services that are well utilized? Are the details of prioritization of requests for services, cost-recovery, and quality control monitoring well-definedwell defined? Will the cores provide opportunities not otherwise available to the investigators through other available federally funded and/or institutional resources? Does utilization of the cores represent appropriate cost savings/cost sharing advantage? Will cores stimulate the development of new approaches? If proposed, is support through an institutional biomedical research core well-justified, and would it provide added value and access to the resource that is beyond that which would be provided for the use of the institutional core through a fee-for- service process? Do the research cores provide support for either early-stage/new investigators or established investigators moving into diabetes research? Is there a mechanism described for selecting and replacing professional or technical personnel within the cores?

Are the plans for soliciting, evaluating and selecting P&F projects clear and appropriate? Is there a clear plan for reviewing and administering funds for the P&F program? If collaborations with other Diabetes Research Centers, or individuals outsideoutside of the research base are described, do they enhance the productivity or quality of the research base; enhance the services offered by the Center; strengthen the Enrichment Program(s); allow for a more efficient use of the Center's available resources; or otherwise benefit the research base? Are there adequate institutional plans and procedures to assure compliance with applicable federal regulations and NIH policies for the protection of human research participants, including the evaluation of risks and protections in project proposals, appropriate ethical oversight of funded projects, and plans for monitoring data and safety in clinical research projects?

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials

Does the application adequately address the following, if applicable

Study Design

Is the study design justified and appropriate to address primary and secondary outcome variable(s)/endpoints that will be clear, informative and relevant to the hypothesis being tested? Is the scientific rationale/premise of the study based on previously well-designed preclinical and/or clinical research? Given the methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions, is the study design adequately powered to answer the research question(s), test the proposed hypothesis/hypotheses, and provide interpretable results? Is the trial appropriately designed to conduct the research efficiently? Are the study populations (size, gender, age, demographic group), proposed intervention arms/dose, and duration of the trial, appropriate and well justified?

Are potential ethical issues adequately addressed? Is the process for obtaining informed consent or assent appropriate? Is the eligible population available? Are the plans for recruitment outreach, enrollment, retention, handling dropouts, missed visits, and losses to follow-up appropriate to ensure robust data collection? Are the planned recruitment timelines feasible and is the plan to monitor accrual adequate? Has the need for randomization (or not), masking (if appropriate), controls, and inclusion/exclusion criteria been addressed? Are differences addressed, if applicable, in the intervention effect due to sex/gender and race/ethnicity?

Are the plans to standardize, assure quality of, and monitor adherence to, the trial protocol and data collection or distribution guidelines appropriate? Is there a plan to obtain required study agent(s)? Does the application propose to use existing available resources, as applicable?

Data Management and Statistical Analysis

Are planned analyses and statistical approach appropriate for the proposed study design and methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions? Are the procedures for data management and quality control of data adequate at clinical site(s) or at center laboratories, as applicable? Have the methods for standardization of procedures for data management to assess the effect of the intervention and quality control been addressed? Is there a plan to complete data analysis within the proposed period of the award?

Environment

Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?

Specific to this NOFO: Is there evidence of institutional commitment to the Center program, including lines of accountability, regarding management of the Center grant and the institution's contribution to the management capabilities of the Center? Is there clear potential for interaction with scientists from other departments and institutions? To what extent will features of the environment described in the Plan for Enhancing Diverse Perspectives (e.g., collaborative arrangements, geographic diversity, institutional support) contribute to the success of the project?

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials

If proposed, are the administrative, data coordinating, enrollment and laboratory/testing centers, appropriate for the trial proposed?

Does the application adequately address the capability and ability to conduct the trial at the proposed site(s) or centers? Are the plans to add or drop enrollment centers, as needed, appropriate?

If international site(s) is/are proposed, does the application adequately address the complexity of executing the clinical trial?

If multi-sites/centers, is there evidence of the ability of the individual site or center to: (1) enroll the proposed numbers; (2) adhere to the protocol; (3) collect and transmit data in an accurate and timely fashion; and, (4) operate within the proposed organizational structure?

Additional Review Criteria - Overall

As applicable for the Center proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give separate scores for these items.

Study Timeline

Specific to applications involving clinical trials

Is the study timeline described in detail, taking into account start-up activities, the anticipated rate of enrollment, and planned follow-up assessment? Is the projected timeline feasible and well justified? Does the project incorporate efficiencies and utilize existing resources (e.g., CTSAs, practice-based research networks, electronic medical records, administrative database, or patient registries) to increase the efficiency of participant enrollment and data collection, as appropriate?

Are potential challenges and corresponding solutions discussed (e.g., strategies that can be implemented in the event of enrollment shortfalls)?

Protections for Human Subjects

For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.

For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.

Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Individuals Across the Lifespan

When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults) to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.

Vertebrate Animals

The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following three points: (1) a complete description of all proposed procedures including the species, strains, ages, sex, and total numbers of animals to be used; (2) justifications that the species is appropriate for the proposed research and why the research goals cannot be accomplished using an alternative non-animal model; and (3) interventions including analgesia, anesthesia, sedation, palliative care, and humane endpoints that will be used to limit any unavoidable discomfort, distress, pain and injury in the conduct of scientifically valuable research. Methods of euthanasia and justification for selected methods, if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals, is also required but is found in a separate section of the application. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals Section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animals Section.

Biohazards

Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.

Resubmissions

For Resubmissions, the committee will evaluate the application as now presented, taking into consideration the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group and changes made to the project.

Renewals

For Renewals, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.

Research Base: Does the Center show evidence of a stable or growing research base with strong and consistent record of scientific excellence and achievement reflected in an outstanding level of productivity and continuing success in securing peer-reviewed research funding? Does the Center show evidence of fostering multi-disciplinary collaborations among its Center investigators? Have such collaborations resulted in new research directions?

Biomedical Research Cores: Are the number and impact of research publications that acknowledge the Center sufficient to justify each core? Is there a significant fraction of papers that a) acknowledge the Center and b) do not have core personnel as co-authors? Are the number and listing of Center investigators who have used the core and resultant key advances consistent with the level of core investment? Do the number and listing of investigators who have used the core multiple times indicate satisfaction and continuing need for core services? Are there sufficient numbers of users who are not core personnel or their collaborators? Are the number and listing of users who are not Center personnel or members consistent with the best utilization of the core by the community? Are the numbers of services/tests completed by each core indicative of a growing need and justify continued support? Is the capacity of each core with current resources sufficient to serve the needs of the Center community? Does the Center provide evidence of ability to evolve cores to meet changing needs of the research community? Does the Center provide evidence of Program Income and/or sufficient institutional support? If applicable, has the national/regional shared resource core been effective as well as beneficial to both the Center members and partnering institution(s)?

Administrative Core (with Enrichment Program): Has the administrative structure proven effective? Has oversight of Center activities, including the P& F and Enrichment programs, been effective? Does the Center website show evidence of continuing maintenance and a high level of quality and usability? Has the Enrichment program fostered multidisciplinary approaches to diabetes research and to attract new investigators or investigators with relevant expertise to diabetes research?

Pilot and Feasibility Program: Are the numbers and types of P&F awards well justified and related to the goals of the Center? Was the P&F program fully utilized during the previous project period? Were awards made to support investigators who fully met the eligibility criteria (as described in the NOFO) for pilot and feasibility support? Are data provided to document the outcome of all P&F projects completed in the last five years (or ten years if applicable), including those that failed to lead to further funding? Has the P& F program led to publications of significant impact, subsequent independent R01 or other peer-reviewed support, and/or attracted new investigators into diabetes-related research? Are research papers generated under these awards, projects successfully funded with independent grants, and key advances linked to these awards well-documented and consistent with the level of support provided? For those Centers who provided P&F support to investigators new to diabetes research and/or to experienced diabetes researchers with innovative ideas, were the P&F awardees successful in their outcomes? If applicable, has the national/regional P&F program been effective as well as beneficial to both the Center and partnering institution(s)?

Revisions

Not applicable.

Additional Review Considerations - Overall

As applicable for the Center proposed, reviewers will consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items, and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.

Applications from Foreign Organizations

Not Applicable

Select Agent Research

Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).

Resource Sharing Plans

Reviewers will comment on whether the Resource Sharing Plan(s) (e.g., Sharing Model Organisms) or the rationale for not sharing the resources, is reasonable.

Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources:

For projects involving key biological and/or chemical resources, reviewers will comment on the brief plans proposed for identifying and ensuring the validity of those resources.

Budget and Period of Support

Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.

2. Review and Selection Process

Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by NIDDK, in accordance with NIH peer review policy and procedures, using the stated review criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA Commons.

As part of the scientific peer review, all applications will receive a written critique.

Applications may undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit (generally the top half of applications under review) will be discussed and assigned an overall impact score.

Appeals of initial peer review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this NOFO.

Applications will be assigned to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this NOFO. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the National Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Advisory Council. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:

• Scientific and technical merit of the proposed Center as determined by scientific peer review.
• Availability of funds.
• Relevance of the proposed Center to program priorities.

3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates

After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access their Summary Statement (written critique) via the eRA Commons. Refer to Part 1 for dates for peer review, advisory council review, and earliest start date.

Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.4.4 Disposition of Applications.

Section VI. Award Administration Information

1. Award Notices

If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. This request is not a Notice of Award nor should it be construed to be an indicator of possible funding.

A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via email to the recipient's business official.

Recipients must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.6. Funding Restrictions. Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs.

Any application awarded in response to this NOFO will be subject to terms and conditions found on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website. This includes any recent legislation and policy applicable to awards that is highlighted on this website.

Individual awards are based on the application submitted to, and as approved by, the NIH and are subject to the IC-specific terms and conditions identified in the NoA.

ClinicalTrials.gov: If an award provides for one or more clinical trials. By law (Title VIII, Section 801 of Public Law 110-85), the "responsible party" must register and submit results information for certain “applicable clinical trials” on the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System Information Website (https://register.clinicaltrials.gov). NIH expects registration and results reporting of all trials whether required under the law or not. For more information, see https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/reporting/index.htm

Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee Approval: Grantee institutions must ensure that all protocols are reviewed by their IRB or IEC. To help ensure the safety of participants enrolled in NIH-funded studies, the recipient must provide NIH copies of documents related to all major changes in the status of ongoing protocols.

Data and Safety Monitoring Requirements: The NIH policy for data and safety monitoring requires oversight and monitoring of all NIH-conducted or -supported human biomedical and behavioral intervention studies (clinical trials) to ensure the safety of participants and the validity and integrity of the data. Further information concerning these requirements is found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/hs/data_safety.htm and in the application instructions (SF424 (R&R) and PHS 398).

Investigational New Drug or Investigational Device Exemption Requirements: Consistent with federal regulations, clinical research projects involving the use of investigational therapeutics, vaccines, or other medical interventions (including licensed products and devices for a purpose other than that for which they were licensed) in humans under a research protocol must be performed under a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigational new drug (IND) or investigational device exemption (IDE).

Prior Approval of Pilot Projects

Recipient-selected projects that involve clinical trials or studies involving greater than minimal risk to human subjects require prior approval by NIH prior to initiation.

• The recipient institution will comply with the NIH Guidance on Changes That Involve Human Subjects in Active Awards and That Will Require Prior NIH Approval.
• The recipient institution will provide NIH with specific plans for data and safety monitoring, and will notify the IRB and NIH of serious adverse events and unanticipated problems, consistent with NIH DSMP policies.

All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Recipients, and Activities, including of note, but not limited to:

• Federal-wide Standard Terms and Conditions for Research Grants
• Prohibition on Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment
• Acknowledgment of Federal Funding

If a recipient is successful and receives a Notice of Award, in accepting the award, the recipient agrees that any activities under the award are subject to all provisions currently in effect or implemented during the period of the award, other Department regulations and policies in effect at the time of the award, and applicable statutory provisions.

If a recipient receives and award, the recipient must follow all applicable nondiscrimination laws. The recipient agrees to this when registering in SAM.gov. The recipient must also submit an Assurance of Compliance (HHS-690). To learn more, see the Laws and Regulations Enforced by the HHS Office for Civil Rights website.

HHS recognizes that NIH research projects are often limited in scope for many reasons that are nondiscriminatory, such as the principal investigator’s scientific interest, funding limitations, recruitment requirements, and other considerations. Thus, criteria in research protocols that target or exclude certain populations are warranted where nondiscriminatory justifications establish that such criteria are appropriate with respect to the health or safety of the subjects, the scientific study design, or the purpose of the research. For additional guidance regarding how the provisions apply to NIH grant programs, please contact the Scientific/Research Contact that is identified in Section VII under Agency Contacts of this NOFO.

In accordance with the statutory provisions contained in Section 872 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), NIH awards will be subject to System for Award Management (SAM.gov) requirements. SAM.gov requires Federal agencies to review and consider information about an applicant in the designated integrity and performance system (currently SAM.gov) prior to making an award. An applicant can review and comment on any information in the responsibility/qualification records available in SAM.gov. NIH will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to the information available in the responsibility/qualification records in SAM.gov, in making a judgement about the applicant’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 2 CFR Part 200.206 “Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants.” This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.

Not Applicable

3. Data Management and Sharing

Consistent with the 2023 NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing, when data management and sharing is applicable to the award, recipients will be required to adhere to the Data Management and Sharing requirements as outlined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. Upon the approval of a Data Management and Sharing Plan, it is required for recipients to implement the plan as described. 

When multiple years are involved, recipients will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. Awardees will provide updates at least annually on implementation of the PEDP.

Progress reports should briefly describe status of pilot projects, including data and safety monitoring, and should notify NIH of serious adverse events and unanticipated problems.

A final RPPR, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. NIH NOFOs outline intended research goals and objectives. Post award, NIH will review and measure performance based on the details and outcomes that are shared within the RPPR, as described at 2 CFR Part 200.301.

The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 as amended (FFATA), includes a requirement for recipients of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later. All recipients of applicable NIH grants and cooperative agreements are required to report to the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at www.fsrs.gov on all subawards over the threshold. See the NIH Grants Policy Statement for additional information on this reporting requirement.

In accordance with the regulatory requirements provided at 2 CFR Part 200.113 and Appendix XII to  2 CFR Part 200, recipients that have currently active Federal grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from all Federal awarding agencies with a cumulative total value greater than $10,000,000 for any period of time during the period of performance of a Federal award, must report and maintain the currency of information reported in the System for Award Management (SAM) about civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings in connection with the award or performance of a Federal award that reached final disposition within the most recent five-year period. The recipient must also make semiannual disclosures regarding such proceedings. Proceedings information will be made publicly available in the designated integrity and performance system (Responsibility/Qualification in SAM.gov, formerly FAPIIS). This is a statutory requirement under section 872 of Public Law 110-417, as amended (41 U.S.C. 2313). As required by section 3010 of Public Law 111-212, all information posted in the designated integrity and performance system on or after April 15, 2011, except past performance reviews required for Federal procurement contracts, will be publicly available. Full reporting requirements and procedures are found in Appendix XII to 2 CFR Part 200 – Award Term and Condition for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.

Section VII. Agency Contacts

We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.

eRA Service Desk (Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, and post-submission issues)

Finding Help Online: https://www.era.nih.gov/need-help  (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)

General Grants Information (Questions regarding application instructions, application processes, and NIH grant resources)
Email: GrantsInfo@nih.gov (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-480-7075

Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: support@grants.gov

Corinne M. Silva, Ph.D.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: 301-451-7335
Email: silvacm@mail.nih.gov

Lan Tian, Ph.D.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: 202-821-7210
Email: tianl@nih.gov

Christina Coriz
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: 301-594-8848
Email: corizc@niddk.nih.gov

Section VIII. Other Information

Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 2 CFR Part 200.