ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE: PARTNERSHIPS FOR COMMUNICATION
RELEASE DATE: April 22, 2003
RFA NUMBER: ES-03-007
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)
(http://www.niehs.nih.gov/)
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
(http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/)
CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE NUMBERS: 93.113, 93.114, 93.115 (NIEHS),
and 93.956 (NIOSH)
Letter of Intent Receipt Date: September 17, 2003
Application Receipt Date: October 17, 2003
THIS RFA CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION
o Purpose of this RFA
o Research Objectives
o Mechanism of Support
o Funds Available
o Eligible Institutions
o Individuals Eligible to Become Principal Investigators
o Special Requirements
o Where to Send Inquiries
o Letter of Intent
o Submitting an Application
o Peer Review Process
o Review Criteria
o Receipt and Review Schedule
o Award Criteria
o Required Federal Citations
PURPOSE OF THIS RFA
The purpose of this program is to strengthen the National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences' (NIEHS) and the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health's (NIOSH) support of research aimed at
achieving environmental justice for socioeconomically disadvantaged and
medically underserved populations in the United States. One goal of the
NIEHS and NIOSH is to understand the influence of economic and social factors
on the health status of individuals exposed to environmental toxicants and
occupational hazards and impact public health. The intent is to promote
health research, education and intervention programs that address improved
ways to serve low income, immigrant, and minorities who may be
disproportionately exposed to environmental and occupational stressors. This
component of the research program in environmental justice is designed to
encourage community outreach, training, research, education and evaluation
efforts that will become the catalyst for reducing exposure to or reducing
the health impact from environmental and occupational stressors in
underserved populations. The main objective of this RFA is to establish
methods for linking members of a community, who are directly affected by
adverse environmental or occupational conditions, with researchers and health
care providers and to create partnerships that can address environmental and
occupational health problems and develop appropriate research and policy
strategies to impact public health.
With the intention of impacting public health and policy the National
Institute of Environmental Health Sciences established the Translational
Research Program. This effort supports research and education examining the
effects and risks to human health from exposure to physical and social
environmental agents. The Environmental Justice agenda, which falls within
the Translational Research Program, is one such endeavor that seeks to
minimize and prevent adverse health effects from environmental exposures
through public outreach and education coupled with innovative research to
develop solutions and have significant impact on public health and policy.
For further information on the Translational Research Program, see
http://www.niehs.nih.gov/translat/envjust/envjust.htm.
This current effort on environmental justice will ensure that:
o The community is aware of basic environmental/occupational health concepts,
issues, and resources.
o The community has a role in identifying and defining problems and risks
related to environmental and occupational exposures and stressors.
o The community is included in the dialogue and is integral in shaping
research and policy approaches to the problem.
o The community actively participates with researchers and health care
providers in developing responses and setting priorities for education and
intervention strategies.
One aim of this program is to facilitate the process of developing the trust
needed for establishing effective partnerships among individuals who are
adversely impacted by environmental and occupational hazard(s) in a
socioeconomically disadvantaged community, researchers in
environmental/occupational health, and health care providers. The
collaborative team should then be able to initiate a research program that
incorporates all parties and seek to reduce exposure to or health impact from
environmental and occupational stressors that may manifest in the workplace
or home environment.
It is important to note that, because of the wide range of environmental
and/or occupational health problems to be addressed and the diversity of
affected communities, applications must be multidisciplinary in nature. At
least one member of each of the following three personnel groups must have an
active and meaningful role in both the development of the application and
conduct of the proposed project:
o A research scientist in environmental health sciences (including but not
limited to those at NIEHS Environmental Health Sciences Centers or NIEHS
Centers for Children's Environmental Health and Disease Prevention Research
or NIOSH Educational and Research Centers or Agricultural Research Centers).
o A primary health care provider directly involved in a community affected by
environmental or occupational hazard(s). This may include a public health
nurse and other such professionals. This individual must have a record of
providing health care to the participating community. It is not necessary
that the person be affiliated with a county or state public health
department.
o A community-based organization (CBO) in an area having an underserved
population that is adversely affected by an environmental or occupational
hazard. This CBO must work directly and regularly with the affected
community.
These personnel must be listed on Page 2 of the PHS 398 application, and a
biographical sketch must be provided for each. The role of each member of
these three personnel groups in developing the application and carrying out
the project must be clearly identified and fully described. There should be
an equitable distribution of responsibilities as well as of requested
financial resources among the three personnel groups. This goal is often
accomplished through the inclusion of one or more subcontract arrangements,
which may be helpful in defining all parties' programmatic and budgetary
roles. Applications lacking the required personnel will not be considered.
The NIEHS and NIOSH have a significant commitment to the support of programs
designed to increase the number of underrepresented minority and female
scientists participating in biomedical, environmental, and behavioral
research. Therefore, applications from minority individuals and women are
encouraged. Since the projects are situated in the community,
well-established community-based or faith-based organizations are encouraged
to consider their capacity to serve as the primary applicant organization.
Due to the complex administrative, programmatic, and financial
responsibilities associated with this role, such groups should contact
Program Staff listed under WHERE TO SEND INQUIRIES for guidance.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
Background
Generally, people want to live long and healthy lives, and a majority of them
achieve that goal. However, people who are economically disadvantaged and/or
who live or work in areas and occupations where conditions result in greater
exposure to hazardous substances are less likely to do so. At every stage of
life, these persons suffer disproportionate levels of morbidity and
mortality. Research evidence suggests that certain groups, especially
minorities and low-income communities, bear an uneven burden of hazardous
environmental or occupational stressors. These socioeconomically
disadvantaged people suffer the lowest life expectancy and the highest
adverse health consequences of inadequate access to high quality health care.
Additionally, they most often experience the highest degree of exposure to
environmental agents and frequently have the least information available
about the health consequences of exposure to these agents.
Environmental justice refers to the need to remedy the unequal burden of
exposure and disease borne by socioeconomically disadvantaged persons in
terms of residential exposure to greater than acceptable levels of
environmental pollution, exposure to occupational hazards, and fewer civic
benefits such as sewage and water treatment. Geographic location plays an
important role in environmental exposure of socioeconomically disadvantaged
persons. Health problems may be exacerbated by issues relating to geographic
location and consequences of the built environment such as the lack of
consistent planning and negligent or unregulated policies in land use and
zoning, the development and expansion of highways near low income and
indigent neighborhoods or inadequate transportation facilities. A specific
under-addressed area of interest to NIEHS is the public health challenge
arising from the health impact of the built environment. For information on
the built environment, see http://www.niehs.nih.gov/translat/news.htm.
The lack of resources for early identification of the effects of toxic agents
may lead to an increased disease burden among people who are economically
least able to cope with it. Most complex chronic health conditions or
diseases have an environmental component in their etiology. An amalgamation
of factors result in exacerbating the health conditions for low income and
minority populations. Many low-income workers are temporary employees or may
be employed in substandard workplaces and therefore may receive inadequate
workplace protections and occupational health and safety training programs.
These workers may also face language or cultural barriers at the workplace.
When this is the case, the community rather than the workplace may be the
preferable place to reach these workers to conduct occupational health
outreach and intervention programs. For more information about occupational
health priorities see http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/nora.html. Some of the issues
identified by research in the field of environmental and occupational health
are:
o Inner-city poor often live in homes with high lead levels and may also be
exposed to higher levels of air pollution.
o Toxic waste sites are more frequent in rural, low socioeconomic counties in
the United States.
o Nuclear facilities and chemical plants are often located in rural areas.
o Exposure to pesticides is another example where rural, socioeconomically
disadvantaged populations are at a greater than average risk.
o Disadvantaged neighborhoods may rely on well water that may be polluted
with toxic chemicals.
o Medical care is often inadequate or unavailable to a significant proportion
of the socioeconomically disadvantaged and minority people.
o Lead poisoning and the cognitive and developmental damage associated with
exposure to lead occur disproportionately among minorities.
o High blood pressure and prostate cancer are very common among African
Americans.
o Low birth weight babies and other problems during pregnancy are common
among groups of women who do not have access to good prenatal care.
o Minority and immigrant workers are employed disproportionately in
industries with higher injury and illness rates, such as food processing,
textile and garment manufacturing, services including health care services,
construction and agriculture.
o Both African-American and Hispanic workers have been shown to be
disproportionately impacted by workplace injuries and fatalities.
o Workers exposed to hazardous substances at workplaces with inadequate
cleanup facilities can contaminate their homes with toxic substances.
Recent Progress and Opportunities
Over the past nine years, the NIEHS has supported a variety of environmental
justice and community-based participatory research programs. For information
on previously funded Environmental Justice projects, see
http://www.niehs.nih.gov/translat/envjust/envjust.htm, and for community
based participatory research programs, see
http://www.niehs.nih.gov/translat/cbpr/cbpr.htm. These programs have been
very successful in achieving open and honest communication between
researchers and community members and have had an impact on the health of the
public. Working together, researchers and community leaders have been
successful in identifying the disproportionate environmental health risks in
certain communities and have formulated viable research agendas. A needed
step in this process is gaining participation of community members in efforts
to understand the problem as well as gather preliminary health and exposure
data. Ongoing projects within the Environmental Justice: Partnerships for
Communication Program are committed to enhancing community participation in
research studies and facilitating communication among
environmental/occupational health researchers, community health care
providers, and community members. Methods utilized in these projects
include:
o Assessment and/or surveys of environmental/occupational hazard(s).
o Community based exposure assessment of environmental pollutants and
hazards.
o Characterization and evaluation of the distribution and health impact of
environmental contaminants and occupational hazards.
o Provision of environmental health and toxic exposure training for health
care providers.
o Development of culturally and linguistically appropriate education and
communication materials.
o Development and implementation of exposure reduction/pollution prevention
strategies.
o Evaluation of training and education materials and assessment of policy
impact.
Objectives and Scope
One component of the mission of the NIEHS and the NIOSH is to promote
research aimed at achieving environmental justice by identifying and
addressing disproportionately high and adverse effects of environmental
pollutants and occupational hazards on human health in low income and
minority populations. The two main objectives of this program are to:
establish methods for linking members of a community, who are directly
affected by adverse environmental/occupational conditions, with researchers
and health care providers; and enable this partnership to develop appropriate
research strategies to address environmental/occupational health problems of
concern to impact public health and health policy. Development of such
community-based strategies to address these health problems requires
approaches that are not typically familiar to environmental, occupational and
medical research communities. Customary approaches to risk assessment and
management often neglect the knowledge and experience of at risk populations
and the socio-cultural context of environmental/occupational hazards. The
distinctive needs of individual communities are only rarely considered in
identifying environmental or occupational health problems and devising
appropriate disease and pollution prevention tactics. In addition, for
occupational health a community setting may be the workplace where the social
and political dynamics are very different from a residential community
setting. Occupational health researchers generally construct their exposure
assessments based on observations and measurements in the workplace and/or
documents provided by the employers. In the residential community setting
many of these exposure sources may be unavailable. Underserved populations
are often diverse, fragmented, and isolated, making it difficult to obtain
their input and to integrate their concerns in decision-making processes.
Assays of the health effects of environmental pollution, as well as
regulations based on such assays, are often performed with little or no input
from the affected community. The purpose of this program is to institute
mechanisms to bridge this communication gap. Once communication and
collaboration have been achieved, researchers and community members should
then develop a research agenda to identify and assess environmental or
occupational risks. Establishing and maintaining trust among all partners is
important throughout the process, as it will enhance the capacity to collect
preliminary health and exposure data. Since the ultimate goal of this
program is to improve health in these populations and reduce the burden of
disease, participation of the affected community is essential for both the
identification of health risks as well as the effective implementation of
policies to reduce exposure. Applicants are therefore expected to create
equitable partnerships among researchers in environmental/occupational
health, health care providers, and representatives of low income or medically
underserved communities affected by environmental health problems.
Types of activities that may be proposed include, but are not limited to:
o Develop efficacious methods for risk communication in low-income and
underserved communities unfavorably impacted by environmental/occupational
hazards.
o Develop community-based, culturally sensitive educational programs to
mitigate adverse health effects from environmental toxicants or occupational
hazards in low-income and underserved communities.
o Carry out community-based training to increase environmental and/or
occupational health literacy, i.e., increase awareness of the public, in such
neighborhoods.
o Train and educate neighborhood health care professionals in the prevention,
diagnosis, and treatment of disorders having an etiology related to exposure
to hazardous substances, i.e., increase awareness of health care providers.
These providers should have a direct role in assisting a community affected
by exposure to an environmental or occupational hazard.
o Develop a research agenda to measure population exposure and/or quantify
human health impacts. We wish to encourage a broad, comprehensive approach
to this problem that emphasizes both education and research.
o Include a comprehensive plan to have an ongoing evaluation from the
inception of the project to its completion – including but not limited to an
assessment of the partnership among various team members and policy and
public health impact.
o Suggest recommendations for future activities, beyond the period of current
funding, to assure continued participation of community members in research
and service programs addressing environmental injustices.
The following four elements must be included in applications submitted in
response to this RFA. Applications lacking any one of the following elements
will be considered non-responsive. Potential applicants are strongly
encouraged to consult Program Staff listed under WHERE TO SEND INQUIRIES
about their capacity to address each of these factors. The required four
elements for each application are:
o Assessment Plan. Identify means of establishing effective input from an
underserved community affected by an environmental/occupational hazard.
Applicants are encouraged to create a community-based advisory board or
steering committee to facilitate planning, education, outreach,
dissemination, and evaluation efforts. Input could be obtained directly from
members of a community affected by an environmental toxicant and/or
occupational hazard as well as from representatives of such groups as
community and neighborhood associations, churches, public housing resident
councils, community health centers, local public health service departments,
and minority educational institutions. An objective assessment process
should be designed to:
- Identify priority areas in environmental/occupational health as perceived
by community members.
- Identify and characterize environmental/occupational stressors of concern.
- Develop a consensus among community members about plausible approaches.
- Build upon existing experience and knowledge within the community.
- Detect any potential constraints in implementing the project.
o Implementation Plan.
- Develop appropriate education and communication modules.
- Develop research, intervention and policy approaches. For example,
projects to collect and analyze exposure/health data would be appropriate and
are encouraged.
- Training/Educational programs in the community and at universities.
o Communication and Dissemination Plan.
- Methods and process for dissemination within the community.
- Method for community members to have a voice that reaches researchers and
health care providers.
- Policy/regulatory impact of the activities carried by this project.
o Evaluation Plan. Evaluation of the project's public health impact should be
integral to the project. Both process and outcome measures should be
addressed. A procedure must be developed to have an ongoing evaluation of
the project, including the usefulness of the project's education,
communication and research activities.
- Process evaluation, includes, but is not limited to:
1. Assessment of interaction and association among various partners in the
project.
2. Assessment of the process of developing and disseminating the education
and training information.
3. The degree of capacity building and leadership training in the community,
of researchers, and health care providers.
- Outcome evaluation, includes, but is not limited to:
1. Assessment of the usefulness of the information disseminated at meetings,
through brochures, etc, to influence the public and health care providers
knowledge and behavior.
2. Assessment of hazardous environmental or occupational exposures and the
capacity of the project to reduce such exposures.
3. Policy, regulatory or legislative impact that results in improved public
health.
4. Assessment of public health outcomes as measured, for example, by lower
rates of exposure to pesticides or/and allergens, etc.
5. Assessment of whether and to what extent the project has been capable of
translating research in environmental/occupational health to the public to
develop prevention, education, and training programs.
It is further encouraged that a social scientist be involved in the
development of quantitative and qualitative tools to assess progress and
programmatic achievements. Applications that do not contain both process and
outcome evaluation components will be considered non-responsive and returned
to the applicant without review.
All of the above elements are essential to fulfill the education,
communication, research, and outreach aims of this RFA. Applicants lacking
any of the above components will be considered non-responsive.
It is important to note that award of a grant under this RFA does not imply a
commitment to future funding of any extensions or new projects planned with
the support of such a grant. Separate applications must be submitted for
such programs, and such applications will be evaluated on the basis of their
own merits.
Activities conducted under this RFA should be consistent with Federal
Executive Order No. 12988 entitled, "Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations." For further
information, see
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/orders/6640_23.htm. To the
extent to which it is practical and permitted by law, grantees shall make
achieving environmental justice part of their project's mission by
identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high- and
adverse human health effects of environmental contaminants on minority,
low-income, and medically underserved populations, including African,
Hispanic, Asian, Pacific Islander, and Native American.
MECHANISM OF SUPPORT
This RFA will use the NIH Education Research Program grant (R25) award
mechanism. As an applicant you will be solely responsible for planning,
directing, and executing the proposed project. This RFA is a one-time
solicitation. Future unsolicited, competing-continuation applications based
on this project will compete with all investigator-initiated applications and
will be reviewed according to the customary peer review procedures.
This RFA uses the non-modular budgeting format. Applicants must follow the
instructions for non-modular research grants applications.
The anticipated award date is July 30, 2004.
FUNDS AVAILABLE
The NIEHS intends to commit approximately $1.67 million in FY04 to fund five
to six new and/or competitive continuation grants in response to this RFA.
The NIOSH intends to commit approximately $500,000 in FY04 to fund two to
three new grants in response to this RFA. An applicant may request a project
period of up to four years and a budget for direct costs of up to $225,000
per year. Indirect costs will be paid at eight percent of direct costs less
appropriate exclusions. This is not a modular grant and a detailed budget is
expected. The application should include within its scope the plans for the
entire length of the grant. Although the financial plans of the NIEHS and
NIOSH provide support for this program, awards pursuant to this RFA are
contingent upon the availability of funds and the receipt of a sufficient
number of meritorious applications.
ELIGIBILE INSTITUTIONS
Community-based organizations are especially encouraged to apply. You may
submit (an) application(s) if your institution has any of the following
characteristics:
o For-profit or non-profit organizations
o Public or private institutions, such as universities, colleges, hospitals,
and laboratories
o Units of State and local governments
o Eligible agencies of the Federal government
o Domestic
o Faith-based or community-based organizations
Foreign institutions are not eligible to apply.
Usually, only one award under this RFA will be funded at an institution or
organization. Although a single institution or organization must be the
applicant, a multi-institutional arrangement (consortium) is possible. Such
consortia, entailing active participation by more than one organization, are
encouraged if there is clear evidence of close interaction and responsible
partnership among the participants. Competitive continuation application
from existing grantees in the NIEHS Environmental Justice: Partnerships for
Communication Program in their fourth year of support will be accepted for
consideration under this RFA. Such applications must follow PHS398
guidelines for competitive renewal, including a progress report. Such
applicants are strongly encouraged to contact Program Staff listed under
WHERE TO SEND INQUIRIES for additional guidance.
INDIVIDUALS ELIGIBLE TO BECOME PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS
Any individual with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry
out the proposed research is invited to work with his/her institution to
develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial
and ethnic groups, women and individuals with disabilities are always
encouraged to apply for NIH programs.
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
To encourage applicants to share information gained via these grants, a
member of each of the three types of required personnel on each project
(scientist, health care provider, and a member of the community-based
organization) will be asked to attend an annual meeting in the Research
Triangle Park, NC area. Applicants should include such travel in their
budget requests.
During the four-year project period, the NIEHS may provide supplemental funds
for logistical arrangement for the annual Environmental Justice grantee
meeting. This meeting will convene all the Environmental Justice grantees
and will serve to inform other Environmental Justice grantees and the
research community of the progress to-date in developing the program,
creating educational materials, the process of dissemination, and the
evaluation program. NIEHS may provide these supplemental funds to the
selected host institution, after the receipt of an appropriate application
and review by Program Staff. Applicants are still expected to provide travel
for the three types of required personnel on each project (scientist, health
care provider, and a member of the community-based organization) in their
grant budget.
WHERE TO SEND INQUIRIES
We encourage inquiries concerning this RFA and welcome the opportunity to
answer questions from potential applicants. Inquiries may fall into three
areas: scientific/research, peer review, and financial or grants management
issues:
o Direct your questions about scientific/research issues to:
Shobha Srinivasan, Ph.D.
Scientific Program Administrator
Division of Extramural Research and Training
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-21
111 T.W. Alexander Drive
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Phone: (919) 541-2506
Fax: (919) 316-4606
Email: sriniva2@niehs.nih.gov
Adele M. Childress, Ph.D., M.S.P.H.
Program Administrator
Office of Extramural Programs
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
1600 Clifton Road, N.E.
Executive Park Building 24, Room 1427, MS E-74
Atlanta, GA 30333
Phone: (404) 498-2509
Fax: (404) 498-2571
Email: ahc0@cdc.gov
o Direct your questions about peer review issues to:
Leroy Worth, Jr., Ph.D.
Scientific Review Administrator
Division of Extramural Research and Training
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-30
111 T.W. Alexander Drive
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Telephone: (919) 541-0670
Fax: (919) 541-2503
Email: worth@niehs.nih.gov
o Direct your questions about financial or grants management matters to:
Ms. Carolyn Winters
Grants Management Specialist
Division of Extramural Research and Training
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-22
111 T.W. Alexander Drive
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Telephone: (919) 541-7823
Fax: (919) 541-2860
Email: winters@niehs.nih.gov
Robin Solow
Contracts Management Branch
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
626 Cochrans Mill Road
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15236-0070
Telephone: (412) 386-6428
Email: rsolow@cdc.gov
LETTER OF INTENT
Prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes
the following information:
o Descriptive title of the proposed research
o Name, address, and telephone number of the Principal Investigator
o Names of other key personnel
o Participating institutions
o Number and title of this RFA
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 NIEHS staff to estimate the potential review workload and
plan the review.
The letter of intent is to be sent by the date listed at the beginning of
this document. The letter of intent should be sent to:
Leroy Worth, Jr., Ph.D.
Scientific Review Administrator
Division of Extramural Research and Training
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-30
111 T.W. Alexander Drive
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Telephone: (919) 541-0670
Fax: (919) 541-2503
Email: worth@niehs.nih.gov
SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION
Applications must be prepared using the PHS 398 research grant application
instructions and forms (rev. 5/2001). The PHS 398 is available at
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html in an interactive
format. For further assistance contact GrantsInfo, Telephone (301) 710-0267,
Email: GrantsInfo@nih.gov.
USING THE RFA LABEL: The RFA label available in the PHS 398 (rev. 5/2001)
application form must be affixed to the bottom of the face page of the
application. Type the RFA number on the label. Failure to use this label
could result in delayed processing of the application such that it may not
reach the review committee in time for review. In addition, the RFA title
and number must be typed on line 2 of the face page of the application form,
and the YES box must be marked. The RFA label is also available at:
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/label-bk.pdf.
SENDING AN APPLICATION TO THE NIH: Submit a signed, typewritten original of
the application, including the Checklist, and three signed, photocopies, in
one package to:
Center for Scientific Review
National Institutes Of Health
6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 1040, MSC 7710
Bethesda, MD 20892-7710
Bethesda, MD 20817 (for express/courier service)
At the time of submission, two additional copies of the application must be
sent to:
Leroy Worth, Jr., Ph.D.
Scientific Review Administrator
Division of Extramural Research and Training
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-30
111 T.W. Alexander Drive
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
79 T.W. Alexander Drive, 4401 Building, 3rd Floor (courier/express service)
Telephone: (919) 541-0670
Fax: (919) 541-2503
Email: worth@niehs.nih.gov
APPLICATION PROCESSING: Applications must be received on or before the
application receipt date listed in the heading of this RFA. If an
application is received after that date, it will be returned to the applicant
without review.
Although there is no immediate acknowledgement of the receipt of an
application, applicants are generally notified of the review and funding
assignment within eight weeks.
The Center for Scientific Review (CSR) will not accept any application in
response to this RFA that is essentially the same as one currently pending
initial review, unless the applicant withdraws the pending application.
However, when a previously unfunded application, originally submitted as an
investigator-initiated application, is to be submitted in response to an RFA,
it is to be prepared as a NEW application. That is the application for the
RFA must not include an Introduction describing the changes and improvements
made, and the text must not be marked to indicate the changes. While the
investigator may still benefit from the previous review, the RFA application
is not to state explicitly how.
PEER REVIEW PROCESS
Upon receipt, applications will be reviewed for completeness by the CSR and
responsiveness by the NIEHS. Incomplete and/or non-responsive applications
will be returned to the applicant without further consideration.
Applications that are complete and responsive to the RFA will be evaluated
for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate peer review group
convened by the NIEHS in accordance with the review criteria stated below.
As part of the initial merit review, all applications will:
o Receive a written critique.
o Undergo a process in which only those applications deemed to have the
highest scientific merit, generally the top half of the applications under
review, will be discussed and assigned a priority score.
o Receive a second level review by the National Advisory Environmental Health
Sciences Council.
REVIEW CRITERIA
The goals of NIH-supported research are to advance our understanding of
biological systems, improve the control of disease, and enhance health. In
the written comments, reviewers will be asked to discuss the following
aspects of your application in order to judge the likelihood that the
proposed research will have a substantial impact on the pursuit of these
goals:
o Significance
o Approach
o Innovation
o Investigator
o Environment
The scientific review group will address and consider each of these criteria
in assigning your application's overall score, weighting them as appropriate
for each application. The application does not need to be strong in all
categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact and thus
deserve a high priority score. For example, an investigator may propose to
carry out important work that by its nature is not innovative but is
essential to move a field forward.
(1) SIGNIFICANCE: Does the project identify key environmental/occupational
stressors that affect the health and quality of life of people who live in or
around communities thought to be at risk? If the aims of the application are
achieved, to what extent will the project further the goals of improving
understanding of environmental/occupational hazards and disease
susceptibility? If the aims of the application are achieved, how do they
advance scientific knowledge? What will be the effect of these studies on
the concepts or methods that drive this field?
(2) APPROACH: Are the conceptual framework, design, methods, analyses, and
evaluation components well developed and integrated, and appropriate to the
aims of the project? Are potential problem areas identified and alternative
tactics suggested?
(3) INNOVATION: Does the project employ novel concepts, approaches or
methods? Are the aims original and innovative? Does the project challenge
existing paradigms or develop new methodologies or technologies? Does the
project establish a focus and adopt appropriate strategies and procedures for
information exchange related to environmental/occupational health problems in
socioeconomically disadvantaged communities? Does the project have a direct
impact on the health or quality of life of individuals in affected
communities (including but not limited to policy and prevention programs),
e.g., by diminishing exposure to environmental toxicants or occupational
hazards?
(4) INVESTIGATOR: Are the investigator and partners appropriately trained
and well suited to carry out this work? Is the work proposed appropriate to
the experience level as the Principal Investigator and to that of other
researchers? Is there evidence of access to, interaction with, and input
from a minority, low-income, or underserved community, whose members' health
is adversely impacted by an environmental or occupational hazards? There
should be evidence of effective involvement of such a community in
development of the application as well as in conduct of the project. There
should be evidence of effective cooperation and interaction in development of
the application as well as in execution of the project among the three types
of required personnel: a researcher in environmental/occupational health
sciences, a health care provider, and a community-based organization in an
area having an underserved population that is adversely affected by an
environmental/occupational hazard. There should be an equitable distribution
of responsibilities among the three types of required personnel.
(5) ENVIRONMENT: Does the scientific and community environment in which your
work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Is there
evidence of institutional support commitment as evidenced by provision of
appropriate resources, services, technical support, and allocation of space?
Is the approach and methodology proposed to accomplish the project's
objectives appropriate and adequate? Has consideration been given to the
effectiveness of the proposed plan in reaching the target audience? For
example, many socioeconomically disadvantaged persons tend not to obtain
information from the written word. Low literacy and/or inability to read and
understand English may be challenges. Materials may need to be generated
that are linguistically and culturally appropriate.
ADDITIONAL REVIEW CRITERIA: In addition to the above criteria, the following
items will be considered in the determination of scientific merit and the
priority score:
PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS FROM RESEARCH RISK: The involvement of human
subjects and protections from research risk relating to their participation
in the proposed research will be assessed. (See criteria included in the
section of Federal Citations, below).
INCLUSION OF WOMEN, MINORITIES AND CHILDREN IN RESEARCH: The adequacy of
plans to include subjects from both genders, all racial and ethnic groups
(and subgroups), and children as appropriate for the scientific goals of the
research. Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects will also be
evaluated. (See Inclusion Criteria included in the section on Federal
Citations, below.)
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
DATA SHARING: The adequacy of the proposed plan to share data and any
publication (such as brochures and other materials).
BUDGET: The reasonableness of the proposed budget and the requested period
of support in relation to the proposed research. In conjunction with the
consistent and an equitable distribution of responsibilities, there should
likewise be an equitable distribution of requested financial support among
the three types of required personnel.
o OTHER REVIEW CRITERIA: The major review factors listed below will be used
in evaluation of applications for this RFA:
- EVALUATION: Plans for evaluation of factors contributing to the project's
effectiveness. Evaluations should include a measure of the impact of the
project on community members' knowledge and awareness of issues and resources
related to environmental health sciences. Similarly, evaluation of the
effectiveness of health care provider training should be conducted. Both
process and outcome evaluation tools should be incorporated. Applications
without evaluation components will be returned without review. It is
imperative to assess whether the project enhances awareness of environmental
health problems among members of the public and/or health care providers
living or working in low-income or underserved communities.
RECEIPT AND REVIEW SCHEDULE
Letter of Intent Receipt Date: September 17, 2003
Application Receipt Date: October 17, 2003
Peer Review Date: February 2004
Council Review: May 2004
Earliest Anticipated Start Date: July 30, 2004
AWARD CRITERIA
Award criteria that will be used to make award decisions include:
o Scientific merit (as determined by peer review).
o Availability of funds.
o Programmatic priorities.
REQUIRED FEDERAL CITATIONS
HUMAN SUBJECTS PROTECTION: Federal regulations (45 CFR 46) require that
applications and proposals involving human subjects must be evaluated with
reference to the risks to the subjects, the adequacy of protection against
these risks, the potential benefits of the research to the subjects and
others, and the importance of the knowledge gained or to be gained.
http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm
INCLUSION OF WOMEN AND MINORITIES IN CLINICAL RESEARCH: It is the policy of
the NIH that women and members of minority groups and their sub-populations
must be included in all NIH-supported clinical research projects involving
human subjects unless a clear and compelling justification is provided
indicating that inclusion is inappropriate with respect to the health of the
subjects or the purpose of the research. This policy results from the NIH
Revitalization Act of 1993 (Section 492B of Public Law 103-43).
All investigators proposing clinical research read the AMENDMENT "NIH
Guidelines For Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical
Research B Amended, October, 2001," published in the NIH Guide for Grants and
Contracts on October 9, 2001, https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-
files/NOT-OD-02-001.html; a complete copy of the updated Guidelines
are available at
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_amended_10_2001.htm
The amended policy incorporates: the use of an NIH definition of clinical
research; updated racial and ethnic categories in compliance with the new OMB
standards; clarification of language governing NIH-defined Phase III clinical
trials consistent with the new PHS Form 398; and updated roles and
responsibilities of NIH staff and the extramural community. The policy
continues to require for all NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials that: a)
all applications or proposals and/or protocols must provide a description of
plans to conduct analyses, as appropriate, to address differences by
sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic groups, including subgroups if applicable;
and b) investigators must report annual accrual and progress in conducting
analyses, as appropriate, by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic group
differences.
INCLUSION OF CHILDREN AS PARTICIPANTS IN RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS:
The NIH maintains a policy that children (i.e., individuals under the age of
21) must be included in all human subjects research, conducted or supported
by the NIH, unless there are scientific and ethical reasons not to include
them. This policy applies to all initial (Type 1) applications submitted for
receipt dates after October 1, 1998.
All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the
"NIH Policy and Guidelines" on the inclusion of children as participants in
research involving human subjects that is available at
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/children/children.htm.
REQUIRED EDUCATION ON THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECT PARTICIPANTS: NIH
policy requires education on the protection of human subject participants for
all investigators submitting NIH proposals for research involving human
subjects. You will find this policy announcement in the NIH Guide for Grants
and Contracts Announcement, dated June 5, 2000, at
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-039.html.
PUBLIC ACCESS TO RESEARCH DATA THROUGH THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT: The
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110 has been revised to
provide public access to research data through the Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) under some circumstances. Data that are (1) first produced in a
project that is supported in whole or in part with Federal funds and (2)
cited publicly and officially by a Federal agency in support of an action
that has the force and effect of law (i.e., a regulation) may be accessed
through FOIA. It is important for applicants to understand the basic scope
of this amendment. NIH has provided guidance at
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/a110/a110_guidance_dec1999.htm.
Applicants may wish to place data collected under this RFA in a public
archive, which can provide protections for the data and manage the
distribution for an indefinite period of time. If so, the application should
include a description of the archiving plan in the study design and include
information about this in the budget justification section of the
application. In addition, applicants should think about how to structure
informed consent statements and other human subjects procedures given the
potential for wider use of data collected under this award.
STANDARDS FOR PRIVACY OF INDIVIDUALLY IDENTIFIABLE HEALTH INFORMATION: The
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) issued final modification to
the "Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information",
the "Privacy Rule," on August 14, 2002. The Privacy Rule is a federal
regulation under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
(HIPAA) of 1996 that governs the protection of individually identifiable
health information, and is administered and enforced by the DHHS Office for
Civil Rights (OCR). Those who must comply with the Privacy Rule (classified
under the Rule as "covered entities") must do so by April 14, 2003 (with the
exception of small health plans which have an extra year to comply).
Decisions about applicability and implementation of the Privacy Rule reside
with the researcher and his/her institution. The OCR website
(http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/) provides information on the Privacy Rule, including
a complete Regulation Text and a set of decision tools on "Am I a covered
entity?" Information on the impact of the HIPAA Privacy Rule on NIH
processes involving the review, funding, and progress monitoring of grants,
cooperative agreements, and research contracts can be found at
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-025.html.
URLs IN NIH GRANT APPLICATIONS OR APPENDICES: All applications and proposals
for NIH funding must be self-contained within specified page limitations.
Unless otherwise specified in an NIH solicitation, Internet addresses (URLs)
should not be used to provide information necessary to the review because
reviewers are under no obligation to view the Internet sites. Furthermore,
we caution reviewers that their anonymity may be compromised when they
directly access an Internet site.
HEALTHY PEOPLE 2010: The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to
achieving the health promotion and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy
People 2010," a PHS-led national activity for setting priority areas. This
RFA is related to one or more of the priority areas. Potential applicants
may obtain a copy of "Healthy People 2010" at
http://www.health.gov/healthypeople.
AUTHORITY AND REGULATIONS: This program is described in the Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance at http://www.cfda.gov/ and is not subject to the
intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health
Systems Agency review. Awards are made under authorization of Sections 301
and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and
under Federal Regulations 42 CFR 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92. All awards
are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other
considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. The NIH Grants
Policy Statement can be found at
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/policy.htm.
The PHS strongly encourages all grant recipients to provide a smoke-free
workplace and discourage the use of all tobacco products. In addition,
Public Law 103-227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking in
certain facilities (or in some cases, any portion of a facility) in which
regular or routine education, library, day care, health care, or early
childhood development services are provided to children. This is consistent
with the PHS mission to protect and advance the physical and mental health of
the American people.