EXPIRED
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.
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
Background
A memorandum of understanding (MOU) between FDA and Duke University published in the Federal Register on November 23, 2007 served as the basis for the establishment of CTTI. Duke University, under the DCRI, was the recipient of a previous 5-year Cooperative Agreement and a previous 5-year grant to support CTTI. This new award will be made to Duke University to continue FDA’s support of CTTI by defraying some of the direct and indirect costs associated with the organization and its projects. The DCRI is Duke University’s academic home for the clinical trial programs and health services research community. It is an integrated support structure that provides resources and training and facilitates collaborative research in clinical and translational research. The mission of the DCRI is to create a seamless continuum from scientific discovery to care delivery to global health.
CTTI is a public-private partnership whose mission is to develop and drive the adoption of practices that will increase the quality and efficiency of clinical trials. CTTI membership is broad and includes interested parties from government, industry, patient advocacy and consumer groups, professional societies, clinical research organizations, and academia. CTTI helps to effect change through the conduct of projects that identify existing inefficiencies, elucidate superior practices, and/or provide innovative approaches to evidence generation and medical product development. CTTI conducts projects that are either 1) proposed by its member organizations, including FDA, developed during review by its Steering Committee, and endorsed by its Executive Committee or 2) responsive to urgent needs of FDA.
The opportunity for meaningful interaction with a broad set of interested parties committed to improving the clinical trial enterprise and also the ability to rapidly gather data to address emerging issues offer significant value to FDA. Since its inception, CTTI has undertaken many projects that have advanced the FDA mission. The projects have helped informed FDA and HHS perspectives, including (but not limited to) informing new policies related to Investigational New Drug (IND) safety reporting, clinical trial monitoring, use of central (Institutional Review Boards (IRBs), and antibacterial drug development. Additionally, CTTI has hosted multiple meetings that convene a broad range of multiple interested parties, to both explore and address issues, and solicit input.
Program Goals
The goals of this program are to develop and maintain an administrative and scientific infrastructure to support the creation and execution of a series of projects and activities under the auspices of CTTI, to complement the goals of FDA to inform and advance regulatory policies and processes, and ultimately to advance public health.
The following CTTI activities are supported by this cooperative agreement:
- Maintaining an adequate administrative and scientific infrastructure to implement all related projects under this collaborative effort;
- Identifying and/or hiring a sufficient number of qualified personnel to conduct the necessary research and manage the project and all related activities, including review of project milestones for degree of completion, preparation/reporting of project findings, and development of periodic and final reports for subsequent distribution in the public domain;
- Developing plans for the conduct of identified research projects;
- Identifying, securing, and/or building, and effectively leveraging other resources for the conduct of identified projects; and
- Identifying and organizing a broad range of interested parties with relevant expertise to explore topics and to understand practical barriers and enablers to help focus evolving initiatives.
- Upon completion of a given project, generating project results and recommendations and proposing related studies/projects, if needed, to build on the findings of the project and continuing to leverage established resources and personnel.
- Communicating results and undertaking activities to drive adoption of recommendations.
Implementation of all related projects under this collaborative effort;
This funding opportunity will use a cooperative agreement award mechanism (U18). In the cooperative agreement mechanism, the Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) retains the primary responsibility and dominant role for planning, directing, and executing the proposed project, with FDA staff being substantially involved as a partner with the PD/PI. Substantive involvement includes, but is not limited to, the following: (1) FDA will work closely with the DCRI throughout the lifetime of this program and throughout all phases of planning, implementation, conduct and reporting of this program and all related projects; (2) FDA will appoint project officer(s) for the task(s) associated with this program and related projects; (3) FDA will identify appropriate staff to provide strategic and scientific input, as needed, throughout the life of this program and related projects.
Project Examples
CTTI projects are conducted by workgroups largely formed from the CTTI membership. In addition, CTTI provides a forum for discussion with all interested parties of issues and proposed solutions that will lead to an improved clinical trials enterprise. This type of collaboration is essential for FDA to achieve its mission of protecting and promoting public health. While CTTI focuses on clinical trials, it may study other types of clinical research (e.g., registries) that can provide data to regulatory agencies. Although CTTI concentrates on the design and conduct of clinical trials in the United States, it also seeks to identify practice improvements that can be applied globally.
Previous and/or ongoing examples of these projects include, but are not limited to, those related to:
- Supporting FDA to meet Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act of 2022 (FDORA) mandates: CTTI collaborated with FDA to convene two public events in 2023. The first was a public meeting with 1,865 global registrants, to discuss recommendations provided by the FDA during the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) to mitigate disruption of clinical studies. The second was a virtual public workshop with nearly 5,000 global registrants to solicit input on increasing the enrollment of historically underrepresented populations in clinical studies and encouraging clinical study participation that reflects the prevalence of the disease or condition among demographic subgroups.
- Transforming Trials 2030: CTTI has developed a vision for how clinical trials should be done in 2030 and is using that vision to guide their priorities. Their vision is that by 2030, clinical trials need to be patient centered and easily accessible, fully integrated into health processes, and designed with a quality approach, maximally leveraging all available data and improving the population's health.
- Measuring Trials Transformation: CTTI launched this project in 2023 to create a robust metrics framework to track progress toward the Transforming Trials 2030 vision. CTTI launched an open comment period for the public on a draft set of metrics. Over a six-week period, CTTI received over 100 comments. The next step is to develop a case study using CTTI’s metrics on a subset of clinical trial data to simulate how the framework may be used to assess progress on achieving the Transforming Trials 2030 vision.
- Digital Health Trials Hub: CTTI created an online hub that makes tools, recommendations, and resources from multiple CTTI projects accessible to help those in the clinical trial enterprise design and conduct clinical trials that are patient-centered, easily accessible, and designed with a quality approach. Multiple CTTI project recommendations and resources are included, such as incorporating novel, digitally derived endpoints in clinical trials, selecting and testing a digital health technology, planning decentralized trials, managing data, supporting clinical trial sites, and interacting with regulators.
- Increasing Diversity in Clinical Trials: Diverse populations have been historically underrepresented in clinical trials, which creates knowledge gaps about the risks and benefits of drugs and devices for the public. To address this discrepancy, CTTI launched recommendations and resources that help interested parties adopt new organization-level practices to increase diversity in clinical trials and develop clinical trial research infrastructure that is more responsive to the needs of diverse populations.
- Challenges Meeting U.S. ClinicalTrials.gov Reporting Requirements: FDA collaborated with CTTI on a project to understand barriers to trial information submission for timely, accurate, and complete registration and reporting of summary results information for applicable clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov. Following in-depth interested parties interviews and a survey, CTTI issued a public report containing strategies and recommendations for improving registration and reporting of summary results information for applicable clinical trials. CTTI is also using this information to develop a list of resources to provide assistance with registering applicable clinical trials and reporting results information on ClinicalTrials.gov.
- Diversity Convergence Project: A collaboration between CTTI, the Multiregional Clinical Trials Center of Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard, FasterCures (a center of the Milken Institute), and the National Academies Drug Forum on Drug Discovery, Development, and Translation began in early 2023 to drive system-level changes to improve representativeness in clinical trials. Multiple efforts to address the lack of diversity, inclusion, and representativeness in clinical trials have been underway, and new efforts continue to emerge. In order to realize the potential impact and scalability of the diversity work happening across the enterprise, the four organizations meet weekly to align goals to achieve transformative changes.
- Real-World Data (RWD): CTTI conducted a project to identify the challenges of and opportunities for incorporating RWD in clinical research to evaluate trial eligibility criteria and recruit potential research participants. Recommendations and resources clarify best approaches for using real-world evidence (RWE) from electronic health records (EHRs) and claims data in randomized clinical trials for regulatory submission and offer a potential roadmap to help sponsors use RWD to design and successfully implement more inclusive clinical trials.
- Patient Engagement Collaborative (PEC): The Patient Engagement Collaborative is a joint project between the FDA and CTTI in which the patient community (PEC members), FDA, and CTTI meet regularly for FDA to obtain input on patient engagement across the FDA. Discussion topics include improving communication, education, and patient engagement related to medical product regulation. The PEC was created in 2018 based on FDA requested public feedback on Section 1137, Patient Participation in Medical Product Discussions, of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA).
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.
Duke University
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 How to Apply - Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as possible. Failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission; please reference 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 How to Apply - 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 How to Apply - Application Guide, except where instructed in this notice of funding opportunity to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the How to Apply - Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
All page limitations described in the How to Apply - 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 the How to Apply - Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this NOFO.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Resource Sharing Plan:
Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the How to Apply - Application Guide.
Other Plan(s):
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 How to Apply - 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 How to Apply - 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 How to Apply - Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered Yes to the question Are Human Subjects Involved? on the R&R Other Project Information form, 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 How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Delayed Onset Study
Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start).
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - 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, FDA’s 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 HHS Grants Policy Statement.
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 How to Apply - Application Guide.
See more tips for avoiding common errors.
Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with application instructions by the 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 the policy. Any instructions provided here are in addition to the instructions in the policy.
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process.
Applications submitted to the FDA in support of the FDA's mission are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the FDA objective review system.
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 address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project rigorous? 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 those in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance, and organizational structure appropriate for the project?
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 included plans to address weaknesses in the rigor of prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed 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 individuals of all ages (including children and older adults), 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 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
For Renewals, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.
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.
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.
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Objective Review Committee convened by the FDA, using the stated review criteria.
As part of the objective review, all applications:
Will receive a written critique.
Appeals of 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 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 recipient’s business official.
Recipients must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.6. Funding Restrictions. Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs.
Any application awarded in response to this NOFO will be subject to terms and conditions found on the Award Conditions and Information for FDA Grants website. This includes any recent legislation and policy applicable to awards that is highlighted on this 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 NoA, 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 the HHS Office for Civil Rights website.
HHS recognizes that FDA 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 System for Award Management (SAM.gov) requirements. SAM.gov requires Federal agencies to review and consider information about an applicant in the designated integrity and performance system (currently SAM.gov) prior to making an award. An applicant can review and comment on any information in the responsibility/qualification records available in SAM.gov. FDA will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to the information available in the responsibility/qualification records in SAM.gov, in making a judgment 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.
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 grant, an "assistance" mechanism (rather than an "acquisition" mechanism), in which FDA programmatic involvement with the awardees is anticipated during the performance of the activities. Under the grant, 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.
2.A.1. Principal Investigator Rights and Responsibilities
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, and presentations at scientific symposia and seminars, while making sure that confidentiality and privacy of the data are protected.
Provide FDA any data obtained from investigations if requested by FDA.
Note that any publication or oral presentation regarding outcomes of this grant must undergo the FDA/CDER review and approval process. This process can take 30-90 days.
2.A.2. FDA Responsibilities
An FDA Project Officer (PO) will have substantial programmatic involvement as described below. The 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.
Financial Reporting:
A. Cash Transaction Reports
The Federal Financial Report (FFR) has a dedicated section to report Federal cash receipts and disbursements. For recipients, this information must be submitted quarterly directly to the Payment Management System (PMS) using the web-based tool. Quarterly reports are due 30 days following the end of each calendar quarter. The reporting period for this report continues to be based on the calendar quarter. Questions concerning the requirements for this quarterly financial report should be directed to the PMS.
B. Financial Expenditure Reports
A required Federal Financial Report (FFR) must be submitted annually. FDA now requires all annual financial expenditure reports to be submitted electronically using the Federal Financial Report (FFR) system located in the eRA Commons. This includes all initial FFRs being prepared for submission and any revised FSR/FFRs being submitted or re-submitted to FDA. Paper expenditure/FFR reports will not accepted.
Annual FFRs must be submitted for each budget period no later than 90 days after the end of the calendar quarter in which the budget period ended. The reporting period for an annual FFR will be that of the budget period for the particular grant; however, the actual submission date is based on the calendar quarter. Failure to submit timely reports may affect future funding.
Performance Progress Reporting:
Annual progress reports are required. The Annual Progress Report will be due as part of the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR).
Grants with Multiple Years: When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR).
Information regarding submitting the RPPR is available at https://era.nih.gov/erahelp/commons/default.htm#cshid=1020
PROGRAM INCOME:
1. The grantee is required to report any Program Income generated during the Project Period of this grant. Except for royalty income generated from patents and inventions, the amount and disposition of Program Income must be identified on lines 10 (l), (m), (n), and (o) of the grantee's Federal Financial Report (FFR) SF-425.
2. Examples of Program Income include (but are not limited to): fees for services performed during the grant or sub-grant period, proceeds from sale of tangible personal or real property, usage or rental fees, patent or copyright royalties, and proceeds from the sale of products and technology developed under the grant.
3. Any Program Income generated during the Project Period of this grant by the grantee or sub-grantee is subject to the Addition Alternative for Program Income and, therefore, must only be used to further the goals of the project for which this grant was awarded.
PRIOR APPROVAL:
All requests that require prior approval must include the award number and bear the signature of an authorized official of the grantee business office as well as that of the PI/PD. Any requests involving funding issues must include a new proposed budget and a narrative justification of the requested changes. If a grantee questions whether prior approval is required for an activity or cost, they should contact the assigned Grants Management Specialist prior to expenditure of funds for clarification.
Below are activities that require prior approval from FDA:
CHANGE IN SCOPE OR OBJECTIVES
CHANGE IN KEY PERSONNEL
CHANGE IN GRANTEE ORGANIZATION
DEVIATION FROM TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AWARD
CARRYOVER OF UNOBLIGATED BALANCES
NO COST EXTENSIONS
SIGNIFICANT REBUDGETING
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, awardees 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 terms and conditions of award and 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 (Transparency Act), 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 (Responsibility/Qualification in SAM.gov, formerly FAPIIS). This is a statutory requirement under section 872 of Public Law 110-417, as amended (41 U.S.C. 2313). As required by section 3010 of Public Law 111-212, all information posted in the designated integrity and performance system on or after April 15, 2011, except past performance reviews required for Federal procurement contracts, will be publicly available. Full reporting requirements and procedures are found in Appendix XII to 2 CFR Part 200 Award Term and Condition for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.
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
Mark Lauda
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER)
Telephone: 301-796-0381
Email: Mark.Lauda@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 by FDA is provided 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.