EXPIRED
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
The policies, guidelines, terms, and conditions stated in this announcement may differ from those used by the NIH. Where this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) provides specific written guidance that may differ from the general guidance provided in the grant application form, please follow the instructions given in this FOA.
The FDA does not follow the NIH Page Limitation Guidelines or the NIH Review Criteria. Applicants are encouraged to consult with FDA Agency Contacts for additional information regarding page limits and the FDA Objective Review Process.
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER)
Analgesic, Anesthetic and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) (U01)
U01 Research Project Cooperative Agreements
New
None
RFA-FD-16-047
None
93.103
This award is intended to provide support for developing and maintaining an organizational infrastructure to support a broad-based public-private partnership under FDA's Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) Initiative. Specific projects under the ACTTION Initiative may also be funded.
April 11, 2016
April 18, 2016
Not Applicable
June 17, 2016, by 11:59 PM Eastern Time.
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.
Applicants should be aware that on-time submission means that an application is submitted error free (of both Grants.gov and eRA Commons errors) by 11:59 PM Eastern Time on the application due date.
Late applications will not be accepted for this FOA.
Not Applicable
July 2016
Not Applicable
September 2016
June 18, 2016
Not Applicable
Required Application Instructions
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this FOA or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts). Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions. Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
Part 1. Overview Information
Part 2. Full Text of the Announcement
Section
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Section II. Award Information
Section III. Eligibility Information
Section IV. Application and Submission
Information
Section V. Application Review Information
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Section VII. Agency Contacts
Section VIII. Other Information
Despite the enormous advances in drug development over the past two or three decades, (e.g., drugs that cure cancer, biologic drug products that halt the progression of rheumatoid arthritis), the development of novel analgesic drug products has lagged behind. Indeed, to this day, the only analgesic drug products that are used widely and successfully are opioids, acetaminophen and the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents (NSAIDs), all of which have serious, potentially life-threatening toxicities, even when used properly. While there has been exploration at the earliest stages of drug development, there has been wide-spread reluctance on the part of the pharmaceutical industry to take novel products further into development. This is in no small part due to the often daunting task of demonstrating the efficacy of analgesics in clinical trials. Many experts in analgesic drug development believe that it is the design of the clinical trials that is at fault in this situation, and that better trial designs will yield more successful results. This hypothesis is certainly supported by the frequent failures of clinical efficacy trials of opioid drug products, considering the well established effectiveness of these products from literally thousands of years of clinical experience. For these reasons, additional studies are needed to assess the confounding nature of analgesic clinical trials and analgesic drug development.
The FDA's Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) Initiative aims to streamline the discovery and development process for new analgesic drug products for the benefit of the public health, and is being developed, in large part, as a public-private partnership (PPP), involving multiple stakeholders. The ACTTION PPP funded through this announcement would be expected to perform activities such as, but not limited to:
Maintain and further develop a scientific and administrative infrastructure of the ACTTION PPP to support a series of projects under the ACTTION Initiative.
The Grantee is expected to provide the necessary support to assist the FDA and its stakeholders in achieving the goals of the ACTTION Initiative. This support would include, but not be limited to the following activities:
Applications should include a plan that maintains and further develops governance and organizational structure of the ACTTION PPP. A plan to identify, manage and, where necessary, reassign resources raised under the auspices of the PPP, to support long-term efforts under the ACTTION PPP. Administrative policies and procedures should be described, including an evaluation component that will assess the administrative and scientific functioning and accomplishments of the ACTTION PPP.
The clinical research experience of the principal investigators (PI(s)), who is/are the Program Director(s) (PD(s)), should be described, together with his/her/their involvement in the daily activities of the ACTTION PPP. It is expected that PI(s) should be an accomplished, well-referenced clinician scientist, at an established research institution, and that the PI(s) have the ultimate responsibility for the implementation and function of the ACTTION PPP. The PI(s) may be assisted by co-Program Director(s) from the same institution or an affiliated institution. Co-Program Director(s) should also be experienced investigators who have administrative skills and backgrounds that complement those of the PI(s). The amount of effort for the PI and co-Program Director(s) should be commensurate with the requirements of the position(s), and not less than two person-months each and preferably sum to not less than 6 person-months per year. This level of effort is required whether or not salary is requested.
The Directors and Administrators of the key functions of the PPP should, in general, be leaders in their respective fields who possess the experience, knowledge, authority, leadership, and administrative skills and capabilities necessary to direct the resources and to speak on behalf of the PPP in national forums. Applicants should explain how their scientific communities would contribute to the selection and allocation of key resources and the implementation of specific projects under the PPP.
More than one PD/PI, or multiple PDs/PIs, may be designated on the application for projects that require a team science approach that clearly does not fit the single-PD/PI model. Additional information on the implementation plans and policies and procedures to formally allow more than one PD/PI on individual research projects is available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/multi_pi. All PDs/PIs must be registered in the NIH eRA Commons prior to the submission of the application (see https://commons.era.nih.gov/commons/).
Applications designating multiple PDs/PIs should include a section of the research plan, entitled Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan (Section 12 of the Research Plan in the PHS 398). A rationale for choosing a multiple PD/PI approach should be described. The governance and organizational structure of the leadership team and the research project should be described, including communication plans, process for making decisions on scientific direction, and procedures for resolving conflicts. The roles and administrative, technical, and scientific responsibilities for the project or program should be delineated for the PDs/PIs and other collaborators.
If budget allocation is proposed, the distribution of resources to specific components of the project or the individual PDs/PIs should be delineated in the Leadership Plan. In the event of an award, the requested allocations will be identified in the Notice of Award (NoA).
Applicants should consider both internal, intra-institution communication platform(s) and external interoperability to allow for communication among ACTTION PPP members and the research partners of clinical and translational investigators (e.g., government, clinical research networks, pharmaceutical companies, commercial vendors, laboratories, and equipment manufacturers). This informatics support is expected to be flexible and innovative. Interoperability, security, workflow, usability, and standards are essential areas of work. To facilitate the conduct of research in health care settings and to transfer research findings into routine care, clinical and translational research must employ applicable standards (e.g., identifiers, vocabularies, transactions, security measures) that are consistent with those adopted by the Department of Health and Human Services for use in U.S. health care and public health operations. All human subjects' data must be handled securely to ensure privacy and confidentiality. Biomedical informatics research activity should be innovative in the development of new tools, methods, and algorithms.
Applicants are responsible for developing a strategy to identify and establish relationships with key experts in the field, including stakeholders from industry, professional organizations, academia, and other Government agencies.
Applications should include detailed plans to form, populate, and convene an Executive Committee to include a scientific and administrative infrastructure.
Applicants should include letters of intent from participating organizations, or a statement that representatives from the organizations are not willing to participate in the Executive Committee.
Applicants should also include detailed plans to form, populate, and convene an independent scientific oversight body to coordinate the overall scientific mission of the ACTTION Initiative. Members of this group should include scientific experts in the fields of analgesic or pain research and report to the aforementioned Executive Committee.
Applicants should identify other committees and their responsibilities as necessary to accomplish the scientific mission of the ACTTION Initiative.
For all committees implemented under the ACTTION PPP, seats allocated to FDA will be filled in accordance with FDA’s Federal Liaison Policy.
Applicants should include plans for annual public workshops to discuss the ACTTION Initiative, ACTTION PPP, associated projects, and related public health needs/goals.
Based on collaboration with the FDA, key stakeholder input, best government, academic, and industry practices, and knowledge gained through workshops, the Grantee will be responsible for developing, defining, and recommending projects. Applicants should, at a minimum, address the following elements, in the areas of analgesia, anesthesia, addiction and peripheral neuropathy. The overall progress processes within each of these areas should be aligned with established strategic goals and provide results and recommendations in alignment with the objectives of the ACTTION Initiative as described below.
Data Analyses of relationships between assay sensitivity and metrics including, but not limited to, and specific research designs, methodological features, statistical analyses, and outcome measures so as to inform the future design of analgesic, anesthetic, addiction and peripheral neuropathy clinical trials. Methodologies for conducting the analyses including data processing, stakeholder involvement and data models to be used should be addressed.
Cooperative Agreement: A support mechanism used when there will be substantial Federal scientific or programmatic involvement. Substantial involvement means that, after award, FDA scientific or program staff will assist, guide, coordinate, or participate in project activities. See Section VI.2 for additional information about the substantial involvement for this FOA.
New
The OER Glossary and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on these application types.
The number of awards is contingent upon FDA appropriations and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications. Future year amounts will depend on annual appropriations, availability of funding and awardee performance.
FDA/Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) intends to fund up to $800,000 for fiscal year 2016 in support of this grant program.
It is anticipated that up to one (1) awards will be made, not to exceed $800,000 in total costs (direct plus indirect), per award.
Application budgets need to reflect the actual needs of the proposed project and should not exceed the following in total costs (direct and indirect):
YR 01: $ 800,000
YR 02: $ 800,000
YR 03: $ 800,000
YR 04: $ 800,000
YR 05: $ 800,000
The scope of the proposed project should determine the project period. The maximum project period is five (5) years.
HHS grants policies as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made in response to this FOA.
Higher Education Institutions
The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for FDA support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
For-Profit Organizations
Governments
Other
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are
not eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible
to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the
HHS Grants Policy Statement, are not allowed.
Applicant Organizations
Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as possible. Failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission.
Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))
All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account. PD(s)/PI(s) should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate their existing account with the applicant organization in eRA Commons. If the PD/PI is also the organizational Signing Official, they must have two distinct eRA Commons accounts, one for each role. Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.
Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with his/her organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for FDA support.
For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.
Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct.
The FDA will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time. This means that the FDA will not accept:
Applicants must obtain the SF424 (R&R) application package associated with this funding opportunity using the Apply for Grant Electronically button in this FOA or following the directions provided at Grants.gov.
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, including Supplemental Grant Application Instructions except where instructed in this funding opportunity announcement to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
For information on Application Submission and Receipt, visit Frequently Asked Questions Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications.
All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed, with the following exceptions or additional requirements:
The following section supplements the instructions found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this FOA.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed with the following additional instructions:
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
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:
Appendix: Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions for completing PHS Inclusion Enrollment Report as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
See Part 1. Section III.1 for information regarding the requirement for obtaining a unique entity identifier and for completing and maintaining active registrations in System for Award Management (SAM), NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code (if applicable), eRA Commons, and Grants.gov
Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission.
Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies). Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, FDA's electronic system for grants administration. eRA Commons 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. Late applications will not be accepted for this FOA.
Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.
Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
All FDA awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.
Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.
Additional funding restrictions may be part of the Notice of Award.
Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.
Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.
For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit Applying Electronically. For assistance with application submission, contact the Application Submission Contacts in Section VII.
Important reminders:
All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile Component of the SF424(R&R) Application Package. Failure to register in the Commons and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the successful submission of an electronic application to FDA. See Section III of this FOA for information on registration requirements.
The applicant organization must ensure that the DUNS number it provides on the application is the same number used in the organization’s profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Management. Additional information may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
See more tips for avoiding common errors.
Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with application instructions by the assigned Grants Management Specialist and responsiveness by components of participating organizations, FDA. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in NOT-OD-13-030.
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process.
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit.
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is there a strong scientific premise for the project? If the aims of the project 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?
Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or New Investigators, or 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?
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?
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? 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 project 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 FDA-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 children, justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
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?
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items, but will not give separate scores for these items and should not consider them in providing an overall score.
For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the six 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 six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.
When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or FDA-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 children to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.
The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following criteria: (1) description of proposed procedures involving animals, including species, strains, ages, sex, and total number to be used; (2) justifications for the use of animals versus alternative models and for the appropriateness of the species proposed; (3) interventions to minimize discomfort, distress, pain and injury; and (4) justification for euthanasia method if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. Reviewers will assess the use of chimpanzees as they would any other application proposing the use of vertebrate animals. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section.
Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
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).
Reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources, are reasonable: (1) Data Sharing Plan; (2) Sharing Model Organisms; and (3) Genomic Data Sharing Plan (GDS).
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.
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by an Objective Review Committee using the stated review criteria.
As part of the objective review, all applications:
Appeals of objective review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this FOA.
Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this FOA. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
Successful applicants will be notified of additional information that may be required or other actions leading to an award. The decision not to award a grant, or to award a grant at a particular funding level, is discretionary and is not subject to appeal to any FDA or HHS official or board.
A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via email to the grantee’s business official.
Awardees must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.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 FOA will be subject to terms and conditions found in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.
All FDA grant and cooperative agreement awards include the HHS Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA.
Recipients of federal financial assistance (FFA) from HHS must administer their programs in compliance with federal civil rights law. This means that recipients of HHS funds must ensure equal access to their programs without regard to a person’s race, color, national origin, disability, age and, in some circumstances, sex and religion. This includes ensuring your programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency. HHS recognizes that research projects are often limited in scope for many reasons that are nondiscriminatory, such as the principal investigator’s scientific interest, funding limitations, recruitment requirements, and other considerations. Thus, criteria in research protocols that target or exclude certain populations are warranted where nondiscriminatory justifications establish that such criteria are appropriate with respect to the health or safety of the subjects, the scientific study design, or the purpose of the research.
HHS provides general guidance to recipients of FFA on meeting their legal obligation to take reasonable steps to provide meaningful access to their programs by persons with limited English proficiency. The HHS Office for Civil Rights also provides guidance on complying with civil rights laws enforced by HHS. Recipients of FFA also have specific legal obligations for serving qualified individuals with disabilities. Please see http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/understanding/disability/index.html. Please contact the HHS Office for Civil Rights for more information about obligations and prohibitions under federal civil rights laws at http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/office/about/rgn-hqaddresses.html or call 1-800-368-1019 or TDD 1-800-537-7697. Also note it is an HHS Departmental goal to ensure access to quality, culturally competent care, including long-term services and supports, for vulnerable populations. For further guidance on providing culturally and linguistically appropriate services, recipients should review the National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health and Health Care at http://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=2&lvlid=53.
FDA considers the sharing of research resources developed through FDA-sponsored research an important means to enhance the value and further the advancement of research. When research resources have been developed with FDA funds and the associated research findings published, those findings must be made readily available to the scientific community.
Upon acceptance for publication, scientific researchers must submit the author’s final manuscript of the peer-reviewed scientific publication resulting from research supported in whole or in part with FDA funds to the NIH National Library of Medicine's (NLM) PubMed Central (PMC). FDA defines the author's final manuscript as the final version accepted for journal publication, which includes all modifications from the publishing peer review process. The PMC archive is the designated repository for these manuscripts for use by the public, health care providers, educators, scientists, and FDA. Please see the FDA Public Access Policy.
Additional terms and conditions regarding FDA regulatory and CDER programmatic requirements may be part of the Notice of Award.
The following special terms of award are in addition to, and not in lieu of, otherwise applicable U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) administrative guidelines, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) grant administration regulations at 45 CFR Parts 75 and other HHS, PHS, and FDA grant administration policies.
The administrative and funding instrument used for this program will be the cooperative agreement an "assistance" mechanism (rather than an acquisition" mechanism), in which substantial FDA programmatic involvement with the awardees is anticipated during the performance of the activities. Under the cooperative agreement, the FDA's purpose is to support and stimulate the recipients' activities by involvement in and otherwise working jointly with the award recipients in a partnership role; it is not to assume direction, prime responsibility, or a dominant role of activities. Consistent with this concept, the dominant role and prime responsibility resides with the awardees for the project as a whole, although specific tasks and activities may be shared among the awardees and the FDA as defined below.
The PD(s)/PI(s) will have the primary responsibility for:
The Principal Investigator/Program Director (PD/PI) will have the primary responsibility for and dominant role in planning, directing, and executing the proposed project, with the FDA staff being substantially involved as a partner with the PI.
Awardees will retain custody of and have primary rights to the data and software developed under these awards, subject to Government rights of access consistent with current DHHS, PHS, and FDA policies.
An FDA Project Scientist will have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below:
The Project Scientist will monitor the project-related activities of the grantee periodically. The monitoring may be in the form of telephone conversations, emails, or written correspondence between the Project Scientist and the PD/PI. Periodic site visits with the PD/PI and other officials of the grantee organization may also occur. The results of these monitoring activities will be recorded in the official grant file and will be available to the grantee upon request, consistent with applicable disclosure statutes and with FDA disclosure regulations. Also, the grantee organization must comply with all special terms and conditions of the grant, including those that state that future funding will depend on recommendations from the Project Scientist. In addition,
a. FDA will have prior approval of the appointment of all key administrative and scientific personnel proposed by the grantee.
b. FDA will be directly involved in the guidance and development of the program.
The FDA Project Scientist will participate, with the grantee, in determining and carrying out scientific and technical activities. Collaboration will also include data analysis, interpretation of findings and, where appropriate, co-authorship of publications.
In addition to the Project Scientist, an FDA Program Official will be responsible for normal stewardship of the cooperative agreement, and will be named in the Notice of Award.
Areas of Joint Responsibility include:
None
Dispute Resolution:
Any disagreements that may arise in scientific or programmatic matters (within the scope of the award) between award recipients and the FDA may be brought to Dispute Resolution. A Dispute Resolution Panel composed of three members will be convened. It will have three members: a designee of the Steering Committee (if a Steering Committee is not active, a designee of the recipient organization) chosen without FDA staff voting, one FDA designee, and a third designee with expertise in the relevant area who is chosen by the other two; in the case of individual disagreement, the first member may be chosen by the individual awardee. This special dispute resolution procedure does not alter the awardee's right to appeal an adverse action that is otherwise appealable in accordance with PHS regulation 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D and DHHS regulation 45 CFR Part 16.
When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually and financial statements as required in the Notice of Award.
A final progress report, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Transparency Act), includes a requirement for awardees of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later. All awardees of applicable FDA grants and cooperative agreements are required to report to the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at www.fsrs.gov on all subawards over $25,000.
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
registration, submitting and tracking an application, documenting system
problems that threaten submission by the due date, post submission issues)
Finding Help Online: http://grants.nih.gov/support/ (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
Grants.gov
Customer Support (Questions
regarding Grants.gov registration and submission, downloading forms and
application packages)
Contact CenterTelephone: 800-518-4726
Web ticketing system: https://grants-portal.psc.gov/ContactUs.aspx
Email: [email protected]
Allison Lin, PharmD, PhD
Associate Director for Special Projects
Division of Anesthesia, Analgesia, and Addiction Products
Office of New Drugs Center for Drug Evaluation and Research
(CDER)
10903 New Hampshire Avenue
Silver Spring, MD 20993
Bldg 22, Room 3123
Telephone: 301-796-3678
Email: [email protected]
Eric Bozoian
Office of Acquisitions & Grants Services (OAGS)
Food and Drug Administration
5630 Fishers Lane
Rockville, MD 20857
Telephone: 240-402-7623
Email: [email protected]
Eric Bozoian
Office of Acquisitions & Grants Services (OAGS)
Food and Drug Administration
5630 Fishers Lane
Rockville, MD 20857
Telephone: 240-402-7623
Email: [email protected]
All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.
Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Part 75.