It is critical that applicants follow the Research (R) Instructions in How to Apply - Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this NOFO or in a Notice from the Guide for Grants and Contracts). Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the NOFO) 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.
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.
- Use the NIH ASSIST system to prepare, submit and track your application online.
- 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.
- Use Grants.gov Workspace to prepare and submit your application and eRA Commons to track your application.
- Public/State Controlled Institutions of Higher Education
- 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 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)
- Small Businesses
- For-Profit Organizations (Other than Small Businesses)
- 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)
- 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
-
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.
- 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 2.3.9.4 Similar, Essentially Identical, or Identical Applications).
- Applications requesting multiple years of support must complete and submit a separate detailed budget breakdown and narrative justification for each year of financial support requested.
- If an applicant is requesting indirect costs as part of their budget, a copy of the most recent Federal indirect cost rate or F&A agreement must be provided as part of the application submission. This agreement should be attached to the RESEARCH & RELATED Other Project Information Component as line #12 'Other Attachments'.
- If the applicant organization has never established an indirect cost rate and/or does not have a negotiated Federal indirect cost rate agreement, a de minimis indirect cost rate of 10 percent (10%) of modified total direct costs (MTDC) will be allowed. MTDC means all direct salaries and wages, applicable fringe benefits, materials and supplies, services, travel, and subaward and subcontracts up to the first $25,000 of each subaward or subcontract. MTDC excludes equipment, capital expenditures, charges for patient care, rental costs, tuition remission, scholarships and fellowships, participant support costs and the portion of each subaward and subcontract in excess of $25,000.
- Indirect/F&A costs under grants to foreign and international organizations will be funded at a fixed rate of 8 percent of modified total direct costs (MTDC), exclusive of tuition and related fees, direct expenditures for equipment, and subawards in excess of $25,000. (With the exception of the American University of Beirut and the World Health Organization, which are eligible for full F&A cost reimbursement). Awards to domestic organizations with a foreign or international consortium participant may include 8 percent of MTDC, exclusive of tuition and related fees, direct expenditures for equipment, and subawards in excess of $25,000.
- Generally, Resource Sharing Plans are expected, but they are not applicable for this NOFO.
- All applicants planning research (funded or conducted in whole or in part by FDA) 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.
- Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as determined by objective review.
- Availability of funds.
- Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.
- Applicant must have an accepted or a reviewable Letter of Intent (LOI) within CDER/CBER's Drug Development Tool (DDT) Qualification Program by the end of application due date of the year the grant application is submitted and is working towards to next qualification submission. Refer to the DDT qualification program web site (https://www.fda.gov/drugs/development-approval-process-drugs/drug-development-tool-ddt-qualification-programs) for the qualification submission information.
Part 1. Overview Information
Part 2. Full Text of the 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
Drug development tools (DDTs) are methods, materials, or measures that can potentially facilitate drug development. To support DDT development efforts, FDA established qualification programs for animal models for use under the regulations commonly referred to as the Animal Rule (see 21 CFR 314.600-650 for drugs and 21 CFR 601.90-95 for biological products), biomarkers, clinical outcome assessments and other innovative technologies. Examples of DDTs may include but are not limited to: a biomarker used for clinical trial enrichment, digital health technologies, a clinical outcome assessment (COA) used to evaluate clinical benefit, or an animal model used for efficacy testing of medical countermeasures under the Animal Rule.
Qualification is a conclusion that within the stated context of use, the DDT can be relied upon to have a specific interpretation and application in drug development and regulatory review under the FD&C Act. Qualification does not encompass the use of a DDT outside the Context of Use (COU) specified through the qualification process.
Once qualified, a DDT may be used within the qualified COU as part of any relevant drug or biologic Investigational New Drug Application (IND), New Drug Application (NDA) or Biologic Licensing Application (BLA) without submission of additional information to justify the use of the DDT. Qualification of a DDT is voluntary, and the use of a qualified DDT is not required for drug or biologic development. However, having qualified DDTs that can be used by multiple sponsors helps optimize drug development and evaluation. Increased public availability of qualified DDTs for specific contexts of use is anticipated to benefit the public health through (1) increased availability of effective drugs, (2) earlier access to medical therapies and (3) an enhanced knowledge of the drug under development. The qualification process allows for greater efficiency of development of DDTs by promoting DDT development in the precompetitive arena through collaborative efforts such as public-private partnerships and consortia.
These grants will be used to provide funding to developers of drug development tools that have an accepted or a reviewable Letter of Intent (LOI) within CDER/CBER's Drug Development Tool Qualification Program and are working towards to next qualification submission as described here: https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DrugDevelopmentToolsQualificationProgram/ucm378219.htm and https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/qualification-process-drug-development-tools-guidance-industry-and-fda-staff. The grants will be used to further the development of tools that, once qualified, will be made publicly available to fill unmet needs in drug development. Applicants should use the outline of the Qualification Plan (QP) or Full Qualification Package (FQP) of the respective DDT program they are in, to assist in developing their grant application. Funding will only support grantee's work towards either their qualification plan or full qualification package.
As the duration of the grant is short with a limited amount of budget, applicants are encouraged to focus the Research Strategy and the Specific Aims to fill the gaps for the subsequent qualification submission, rather than describing the entire development effort. Limit the scope of the proposal to what you can achieve and deliver within the duration of the grant support. For example, you can focus on a component of the plan such as Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP) that requires additional work or addressing specific recommendations from FDA.
See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.
HHS grants policies as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made from this NOFO.
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
Local Governments
Other
These grants will be used to provide funding to developers of drug development tools that have an accepted or a reviewable Letter of Intent (LOI) within a CDER/CBER's Drug Development Tool Qualification Program and are working towards their qualification plan (QP) or full qualification package (FQP).
If you received DDT research grant support from FDA-CDER/CBER in previous years, you are eligible to apply provided that you have successfully progressed to the next submission milestone (e.g., Accepted LOI to Accepted QP) and are requesting additional funding for new DDT project needs addressing different aspects of the project.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Organizations) 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, please reference HHS Grants Policy Statement for additional information.
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 their organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from diverse backgrounds, including underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, individuals with disabilities, and women 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 NOFO 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 per 2.3.7.4 Submission of Resubmission Application. This means that the FDA will not accept:
The application forms package specific to this opportunity must be accessed through ASSIST, Grants.gov Workspace or an institutional system-to-system solution. Links to apply using ASSIST or Grants.gov Workspace are available in Part 1 of this NOFO. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution.
It is critical that applicants follow the Research (R) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed in this notice of funding opportunity 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.
All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
For this specific NOFO, the Research Strategy section is limited to 30 pages.
The following section supplements the instructions found in SF424 (R&R) Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this NOFO.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed. with the following additional instructions:
11. Descriptive Title of Applicant's Project: Applicants must include DDT submission number in the Project Title. The format should be DDT-AMQ-000XX, DDT-BMQ-000XX, DDT-COA-000XX, etc.
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.
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:
Specific Aims and Research Strategy:
These grants will be used to provide funding to developers of drug development tools that have an accepted or a reviewable Letter of Intent (LOI) within CDER/CBER's Drug Development Tool Qualification Program and are working towards to next qualification submission as described here: https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DrugDevelopmentToolsQualificationProgram/ucm378219.htm and https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/qualification-process-drug-development-tools-guidance-industry-and-fda-staff. The grants will be used to further the development of tools that, once qualified, will be made publicly available to fill unmet needs in drug development. Applicants should use the outline of the Qualification Plan (QP) or Full Qualification Package (FQP) of the respective DDT program they are in, to assist in developing their grant application. Funding will only support grantee's work towards either their qualification plan or full qualification package.
As the duration of the grant is only for one year with a limited amount of budget, applicants are encouraged to focus the Research Strategy and the Specific Aims to fill the gaps for the subsequent qualification submission, rather than describing the entire development effort.
For example, you can focus on a component of the plan such as Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP) that requires additional work or addressing concerns identified during the discussions with FDA.
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:
All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, should address a Data Sharing Plan
Note: Effective for due dates on or after January 25, 2023, the Data Management and Sharing Plan will be attached in the Other Plan(s) attachment in FORMS-H application forms packages.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Appendix:
Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or FDA-defined clinical trials (and when applicable, clinical trials research experience) 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 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.
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. 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). Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, the electronic system for grants administration. FDA 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 FDA Policy on Late Application Submission.
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 How to Apply 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.
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 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) 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 FDA. See Section III of this NOFO for information on registration requirements.
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 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 FDA Grants Management Specialist and responsiveness by components of participating organizations. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.
Post-submission materials are those submitted after submission of the grant application but prior to objective review. They are not intended to correct oversights or errors discovered after submission of the application. FDA accepts limited information between the time of initial submission of the application and the time of objective review. Applicants must contact the assigned Grants Management Specialist to receive approval, prior to submitting any post submission materials. Acceptance and/or rejection of any post submission materials is at the sole discretion of the FDA. Any inquiries regarding post submission materials should be directed to the assigned Grants Management Specialist.
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process.
Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project 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 project 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 project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.
Does the project proposed address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the drug development? Is there a strong scientific premise for the project? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, clinical practice, and drug development process be improved? How will successful completion of the project change the current paradigm of assessments and accelerate the development of safe and effective medical products for the patients who need them the most?
Are the aims of the proposal well aligned with the scope of the DDT qualification program and of the current standing of the project based on the discussions with FDA? Is the proposal well developed to overcome the issues and roadblocks that currently hamper the progress of the project towards the DDT qualification? Does the proposal adequately address prior questions from FDA and is it consistent with prior inputs and recommendations from FDA? If these aims are achieved successfully, does it enable the project to move towards to the next steps in the qualification? Is there a plan in place to make this tool available, accepted and adopted widely by the communities?
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? Is the approach feasible, practical and
implementable in the real world, technologically, logistically and economically? Have the
investigators presented adequate plans to deliver a preliminary progress at 6 months (a QP or
FQP submission) and tangible results at the completion of the grant period (a reviewable QP or
FQP)?
Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to carry out the project? Do
they have a record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? Do they have strong
credentials to achieve consensus or to bring accepted practices in the relevant research
communities? E.g. creation and adaptation of new standards.
Are the investigators and collaborators assembled for this proposal complementary and have well-
integrated expertise to overcome the identified roadblocks and to make significant progress
towards the DDT qualification? E.g. execution of statistical analysis plan (SAP), access to clinical
data and other resources for validation etc.
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?
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 individuals of all ages (including children and older adults), justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
As applicable for the project 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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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
As applicable for the project 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.
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 Resource Sharing Plan(s) (e.g., Sharing Model Organisms) or the rationale for not sharing the resources, is reasonable.
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.
As part of the objective review, all applications:
Will receive a written critique.
Appeals of initial objective review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this NOFO.
Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this NOFO. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
Successful applicants will be notified of additional information that may be required for 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 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 in the HHS Grants Policy Statement website.
All FDA grant and cooperative agreement awards include the HHS Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA.
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 an 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 HHS Office for Civil Rights website.
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. For additional guidance regarding how the provisions apply to FDA 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), FDA awards will be subject to the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) requirements. FAPIIS requires Federal award making officials to review and consider information about an applicant in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS) prior to making an award. An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through FAPIIS and comment on any information about itself that a Federal agency previously entered and is currently in FAPIIS. The Federal awarding agency will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to other information in FAPIIS, 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 FDA grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.
Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions 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 (HHS) grant administration regulations at 45 CFR Part 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, 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 in the activities. Consistent with this concept, the dominant role and prime responsibility resides with the awardees for the project as a whole, although specific tasks and activities may be shared among the awardees and FDA as defined below.
The PD(s)/PI(s) will have the primary responsibility for:
The PD(s)/PI(s) will have the primary responsibility for the scientific, technical, or programmatic aspects of the cooperative agreement and for day-to-day management of the project or program. The PD(s)/PI(s) will maintain general oversight for ensuring compliance with the financial and administrative aspects of the award, as well as ensuring that all staff have sufficient clearance and/or background checks to work on this project or program. This individual will work closely with designated officials within the recipient organization to create and maintain necessary documentation, including both technical and administrative reports; prepare justifications; appropriately acknowledge Federal support in publications, announcements, news programs, and other media; and ensure compliance with other Federal and organizational requirements.
Awardees will retain custody of and have primary rights to the data and software developed under these awards, subject to Government rights of access consistent with current HHS, PHS, and FDA policies.
Additionally PD/PIs will:
Participate in site visits or attend meetings as requested by the FDA. A portion of the budget should be reserved for such travel.
Submit data for quality assessment and/or validation in any manner if requested by FDA.
Conduct the clinical trial in compliance with all applicable regulations, rules and guidance, and with the Terms and Conditions of Award.
Make the resources available for site inspections during and/or after the study if requested by FDA.
FDA may also request data be made available through speaking engagements and publications, presentations at scientific symposia and seminars, while making sure that confidentiality and privacy of the data is protected.
Provide FDA any data obtained from investigations if requested by FDA.
FDA staff have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below:
An FDA Project Officer (PO) is the official responsible for the programmatic, scientific, and/or technical aspects of assigned applications and grants. The PO's responsibilities include, but are not limited to, post-award monitoring of project/program performance, including review of progress reports and making site visits; and other activities complementary to those of the Grants Management Officer (GMO). The PO and the GMO work as a team in many of these activities.
Additionally, an agency program official will be responsible for the scientific and programmatic stewardship of the award and will be named in the award notice.
FDA will provide technical monitoring and/or guidance of the work, including monitoring of data analysis, interpretation of analytical findings and their significance.
FDA will assist and approve (as deemed appropriate) the substance of publications, co-authorship of publications and data release.
Consistent with the 2023 HHS 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 HHS 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 HHS Grants Policy Statement.
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 HHS Grants Policy Statement. FDA NOFOs outline intended research goals and objectives. Post award, FDA 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 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 the threshold. See the HHS 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 (currently 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.
[Adequacy of the progress and the completeness of the project at the end will be evaluated by the Program office.]
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)
Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding
Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: support@grants.gov
CDR Val rie Jimenez
Animal Model Qualification Program
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER)
Telephone: 240-402-6019
Email: AnimalModelQualification@fda.hhs.gov
Biomarker Qualification Program
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER)
Telephone: 301-796-0017
Email: CDER-BiomarkerQualificationProgram@fda.hhs.gov
Clinical Outcome Assessment Qualification Program
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER)
Telephone: 301-796-0967
Email: COADDTQualification@fda.hhs.gov
Innovative Science and Technology Approaches for New Drugs
(ISTAND) Pilot Program
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER)
Email: ISTAND@fda.hhs.gov
For questions regarding grants at
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER)
Email: Michael.Fischer@fda.hhs.gov
Terrin Brown
Office of Acquisitions & Grants Services (OAGS)
Food and Drug Administration
Email: Terrin.Brown@fda.hhs.gov
Terrin Brown
Office of Acquisitions & Grants Services (OAGS)
Food and Drug Administration
Email: Terrin.Brown@fda.hhs.gov
Recently issued policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published in the Guide for Grants and Contracts. 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 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.
and Human Services (HHS)
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.