POPULATION RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM

Release Date:  March 9, 2000

RFA:  HD-00-011

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

Letter of Intent Receipt Date:  August 15, 2000
Application Receipt Date:       October 17, 2000

PURPOSE

The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), through 
the Demographic and Behavioral Sciences Branch (DBSB), Center for Population 
Research (CPR), invites applications for infrastructure grants in support of 
population research relevant to the DBSB funding mission.  Funds may be 
requested to support infrastructure and/or research designed to 1) enhance 
the quality and quantity of relevant research conducted at an institution; 
and 2) develop new research capabilities to advance population research 
through innovative approaches.  A central goal of this program is to 
facilitate interdisciplinary collaboration and innovation in population 
research while providing essential and cost-effective core services in 
support of the development, conduct, and translation of relevant research 
based in population research centers or comparable administrative units.

HEALTHY PEOPLE 2010

The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving the health 
promotion and disease prevention objectives of “Healthy People 2010,” a PHS-
led national activity for setting priority areas.  This RFA is related to 
several of the priority areas.  Potential applicants may obtain “Healthy 
People 2010” at http://www.health.gov/healthypeople/.

ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS

Applications may be submitted by domestic, for-profit and non-profit 
organizations, public and private, such as universities, colleges, hospitals, 
laboratories, units of State and local governments, and eligible agencies of 
the Federal government.  Foreign institutions are not eligible to apply.  
Racial/ethnic minority individuals, women, and persons with disabilities are 
encouraged to apply as Principal Investigators.

Potential applicants are strongly encouraged to contact staff listed under 
INQUIRIES, below, to discuss eligibility prior to submission of an 
application.

MECHANISM OF SUPPORT

This RFA will use the National Institutes of Health (NIH) resource-related 
research project grant (R24) award mechanism.  This mechanism is used to 
support projects that enhance the capabilities of resources to contribute to 
NIH extramural research.  Responsibility for the planning, direction, and 
execution of the proposed project will be solely that of the applicant.  
NICHD expects to issue an RFA annually to solicit applications for this 
program; applications may be submitted only in response to an RFA.

FUNDS AVAILABLE

The NICHD intends to commit approximately $1,870,000 in total costs [Direct 
plus Facilities and Administrative (F & A) costs] in FY 2001 to fund three to 
six new and/or competing continuation grants in response to this RFA.  
Although the financial plans of the NICHD provide support for this program, 
awards pursuant to this RFA are contingent upon the availability of funds and 
the receipt of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.

An applicant should request a total project period of five years.  Because 
the nature and scope of the research proposed may vary, it is anticipated 
that the size of awards also will vary.  Applicants should request support 
appropriate to the size and impact of their scientific portfolio and to the 
goals of their infrastructure program.  As a general rule, for the purposes 
of this RFA, NICHD expects direct cost budget requests of approximately 
$150,000 for each 10 researchers in the program who can provide evidence of 
research activity relevant to the mission of DBSB in two or more of the 
following categories:  (1) externally funded research grants or contracts in 
the past three years; (2) publications in peer-reviewed journals during the 
past three years; and/or (3) papers in preparation and future plans for 
research.  See SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS, below, for further information on these 
categories of research activity.  Requests may vary from this guideline as 
justified by evidence of exceptionally high impact or productivity or special 
features of the proposed infrastructure program.  Applicants are encouraged 
to discuss budget requests with program staff listed under INQUIRIES, below, 
prior to submission.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

Background

The Demographic and Behavioral Sciences Branch is one of three programs in 
the Center for Population Research of the National Institute of Child Health 
and Human Development.  The mission of the Branch is to foster research on 
the processes that determine population size, growth, composition, and 
distribution, and on the determinants and consequences of those processes.  
This mission translates into a research portfolio that looks intensively at 
the demographic processes of fertility, mortality, and migration and at their 
broad interrelationships with larger social, economic, and cultural 
processes.  Areas of supported research include fertility and family 
planning, sexually transmitted disease, family and household demography, 
mortality and health, population movement, and population composition and 
change.  Relevant research can cover a broad spectrum of scientific 
approaches in the clinical, behavioral, and social sciences.

Since 1972, NICHD has been providing infrastructure support for population 
research through the Center Core Grant (P30) and Specialized Research Center 
Grant (P50) mechanisms.  In 1999, NICHD undertook a comprehensive review of 
this program to determine whether its structure and guidelines best served 
the future needs of population research.  A report summarizing the results of 
this review is available at 
http://www.nichd.nih.gov/about/cpr/dbs/pubs/report.pdf  and from the program 
contact named under INQUIRIES.  As a result of the review, NICHD will phase 
out the P30 and P50 mechanisms in favor of the Infrastructure Grant (R24) for 
purposes of providing support for the development of infrastructure for 
population research. 

Objectives and Scope

The primary purposes of the Population Research Infrastructure Program are to 
provide resources for research that will improve the understanding of the 
antecedents and consequences of population structure and change, facilitate 
interdisciplinary collaboration among investigators conducting population-
related research, and promote innovative approaches to population research 
questions.  An additional goal is to facilitate interaction among scientists 
in locations throughout the United States to contribute to the integration 
and coordination of population research. 

The Infrastructure Grant will retain some of the characteristics of 
traditional P30 and P50 grants.  It will continue to provide infrastructure 
to support a portfolio of relevant research at an institution.  However, it 
is designed to move beyond the traditional center grant mechanism to allow 
institutions to aggressively pursue scientific opportunities that are 
appearing at the boundaries between traditional population research and 
allied fields, and to facilitate partnerships among diverse scientists and 
institutions.  The Infrastructure Grant replaces the “cost accounting” 
approach required in the traditional P30 grant with a streamlined format that 
allows more flexible use of funds to address not only the core support needs 
of existing projects, but also the development of new directions and 
approaches to population research and the translation of research findings.

Projects and themes proposed in applications responding to this RFA must be 
relevant to the DBSB funding mission.  A description of the DBSB mission is 
available at http://www.nichd.nih.gov/about/cpr/dbs/dbs.htm. Examples of 
relevant population research topics are listed below and applicants may 
concentrate on any combination of relevant topics. Applicants are encouraged 
to consult with program staff listed under INQUIRIES to determine the 
relevance of other topics to the DBSB funding mission. The following examples 
are to be considered illustrative:

1.  Antecedents and consequences of changes in population size, structure, 
and composition, including the relationship of economic development to 
population growth and decline; population modeling and the projection and/or 
prediction of human population change; the interrelationship between 
population and the physical environment.

2.  Family and household dynamics, including issues related to 
intergenerational relationships.

3.  Fertility and family planning, including issues related to union 
formation and dissolution; births and birth spacing; family size; gender in 
relation to fertility; social acceptability of measures for the biological 
regulation of human fertility.

4.  Causes and consequences of migration of human population groups, 
including issues related to international migration; internal spatial 
distribution.

5.  Demographic aspects of health, morbidity, disability, and mortality, 
including issues related to the influence of early life on later life 
development and outcomes; status of children; the interrelationship between 
health and socioeconomic status.

6.  Social, demographic, and behavioral studies of sexual behavior, sexually 
transmitted diseases, and contraception.

Categories of Infrastructure Support

Applicants may request support in the following categories:  Research Support 
Cores, Developmental Infrastructure, Translational Cores, Cooperative 
Infrastructure, and Research Projects. Applicants are not expected to request 
support in all or even most of the categories.  

The types and amounts of support requested must be justified in terms of the 
scope, objectives, and impact of the program, the potential contribution of 
requested support for advancing the research program, and the cost-
effectiveness of the requested support in addressing the goals of this RFA.  
Applicants are expected to define guidelines for determining the eligibility 
of researchers and research projects to access resources provided under this 
program, and guidelines and procedures for allocating such resources.  No 
restrictions on access (e.g., by students, investigators lacking research 
support, investigators in fields other than population research, etc.) are 
imposed under this announcement.  However, the guidelines and procedures 
proposed by applicants for controlling access must be justified in terms of 
their effectiveness in meeting the goals of this RFA.

o  Research Support Cores provide shared resources in support of a 
significant portfolio of relevant population research.  Examples include: 

Administrative Core, providing for coordination of research, editorial 
services, and/or assistance with grant application development and fiscal 
management of grants.

Computing Core, providing equipment and/or services in support of shared 
computing needs. 

Information Core, providing support for the retrieval of various types of 
information resources commonly used in population research, such as published 
materials and data.

Cores providing support for specific methodologies employed in population 
research (e.g., GIS, statistical methods, biomarkers, survey methodologies).

Equipment and support services that are specific to individual research 
projects or researchers are not allowable, except in the context of 
individual research projects that may be proposed. 

Applicants also may request up to $50,000 in direct costs annually to support 
“coordination activities” that will promote communication, dissemination, 
and/or cost-efficiencies among centers of population research, including at a 
minimum all those units funded under this announcement and existing P30/P50 
Population Research Centers.  Examples of potential activities include 
development of a central website, management of a listserve, organization of 
conferences focused on research or issues of concern to population centers, 
and clearinghouse-type activities to promote access to and dissemination of 
scarce research resources.   

o  Developmental Infrastructure refers to activities that promote the 
development of new research capabilities.  Examples include:

Seed grant programs, providing funds for the development of new research 
projects.  Institutions proposing seed grant programs must develop guidelines 
and eligibility requirements appropriate to the goals of this RFA, and 
procedures for administration and peer review of the program.

Faculty development, providing for partial or full salary support or other 
support for the recruitment of new faculty in scientific areas critical to 
the development of innovative and/or interdisciplinary research directions.  
Support for any one individual may not exceed three years in duration.

Activities that foster the development of new core services.  For example, 
applicants may propose consulting services to assist with the design of GIS 
services, or conduct pilot studies to test alternative modes of delivery of 
existing services for cost-effectiveness.

Workshops, conferences, seminar series, and visiting scholar programs that 
lay the groundwork for new substantive work or foster new research 
collaborations.

o  Translational Cores may provide support for public use access to large 
data collection projects and/or outreach efforts to elucidate the clinical or 
public policy implications of  research.  Examples include data enclaves that 
permit use of restricted data in secure settings and summaries of research 
that are targeted to non-research audiences.  

o  Cooperative Infrastructure refers to activities to develop research 
partnerships involving scientists in the applicant’s program and colleagues 
in other institutions, and/or joint ventures with other institutions to 
provide research, developmental, or translational services to researchers.  
Proposed research partnerships must be justified in terms of the scientific 
advances to be gained through collaborations across institutions relative to 
those likely to emerge from within-institution partnerships.  Examples of 
allowable activities include travel for project development and coordination 
and use of research support core, seed project, and research project funds.  
Applicants also may propose cooperative research support, developmental, or 
translational services in which the applicant and a Population Center or 
similar unit in another institution participate in joint funding and 
administration of a common service or resource.  Examples might include a 
shared library, data archive, or outreach effort.  Partners in a cooperative 
venture need not be another funded applicant or Center.  Applicants must 
clearly describe the rights and responsibilities of each proposed partner in 
the funding, administration, and use of shared resources.

o  Research Projects proposed must directly embody and advance the program’s 
core or “signature” scientific objectives and should emphasize innovative, 
interdisciplinary, and/or cross-cutting elements.  Institutions are 
encouraged to consider R01 and other research grant mechanisms for the 
support of research projects that do not explicitly meet these criteria.

SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS

Applicant institutions must have an established research center or other 
administrative unit (hereafter referred to as the “unit”) that serves as a 
focal point for or coordinates population research across the institution.  
This unit must have a defined governance structure.  The Principal 
Investigator should be a scientist or science administrator who can provide 
effective administrative and scientific leadership.  The research program 
conducted at the unit should reflect scientific benefits and cost-
efficiencies resulting from cooperation and interaction among a pool of 
scientists with shared interests in population research.

To be eligible to apply, the unit must have at least three researchers who 
can present evidence of research activity related to the mission of DBSB in 
all three of the following categories: (1) externally funded research grants 
or contracts in the past three years; (2) publications in peer-reviewed 
journals during the past three years; (3) papers in preparation and future 
plans for research. The “past three years” refers to the 36-month period 
preceding the application submission date for this RFA.  “Externally funded” 
means funding is received from sources outside the institution; it may 
include funding from NIH, NSF, other federal agencies, state and local 
governments, and private foundations.  Include only projects on which the 
individual has served as Principal Investigator or had substantial 
involvement, comparable to that indicated by identification of an 
investigator as “key personnel” on an NIH-funded grant.

Note that the criterion used for eligibility above (at least three 
researchers with evidence of research activity in all three categories) 
differs from the criteria used to define guidelines for requested budgets 
under FUNDS AVAILABLE and to define page limitations under APPLICATION 
PROCEDURES - C. RESEARCH ACTIVITY.  In each of the latter two cases, the 
criterion of an “active researcher” is evidence of research activity in at 
least two of the three categories defined above.

In addition, because the Infrastructure Program is expected to enhance the 
unit’s competitiveness for NIH funding, the institution and pertinent 
departments are expected to show a strong commitment to the unit and matching 
the requested infrastructure support at a level appropriate to the resources 
of the institution and the scope of the proposed program activities.  Such 
commitment may be demonstrated by the provision of dedicated space, faculty 
appointments in subject areas relevant to the goals of the program, salary 
support for investigators or core staff, dedicated equipment, or other 
financial support for the proposed program.  Applicants are encouraged to 
consult with program staff listed under “INQUIRIES” to discuss this 
requirement.

INCLUSION OF WOMEN AND MINORITIES IN RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS

It is the policy of the NIH that women and members of minority groups and 
their subpopulations must be included in all NIH supported biomedical and 
behavioral research projects involving human subjects unless a clear and 
compelling rationale and justification are provided that inclusion is 
inappropriate with respect to the health of the subjects or the purpose of 
the research.  This policy results from the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 
(Section 492B of Public Law 103-43).

All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the 
“NIH Guidelines for Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical 
Research,” published in the Federal Register of March 28, 1994 (59 FR 14508-
14513) and in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, Volume 23, Number 11, 
March 18, 1994, and available at:  
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not94-100.html. 

INCLUSION OF CHILDREN AS PARTICIPANTS IN RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS

It is the policy of NIH that children (i.e., individuals under the age of 21) 
must be included in all human subjects research, conducted or supported by 
the NIH, unless there are scientific and/or ethical reasons not to include 
them.  This policy applies to all initial (Type 1) applications submitted for 
receipt dates after October 1, 1998.

All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the 
“NIH Policy and Guidelines on the Inclusion of Children as Participants in 
Research Involving Human Subjects,” published in the NIH Guide for Grants and 
Contracts, March 6, 1998, and available at:  
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not98-024.html. 

Investigators also may obtain copies of these policies from the program staff 
listed below under INQUIRIES.

LETTER OF INTENT

Prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes a 
descriptive title of the proposed research, the name, address, and telephone 
number of the Principal Investigator, the identities of other key personnel 
and participating institutions, and the number and title of this RFA.  
Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not 
enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information that it 
contains allows NICHD staff to estimate the potential review workload and 
avoid conflict of interest in the review.

The letter of intent is to be sent to Dr. Christine Bachrach at the address 
listed under INQUIRIES, below, by August 15, 2000.

URLs IN NIH GRANT APPLICATIONS OR APPENDICES

All applications and proposals for NIH funding must be self-contained within 
specified page limitations.  Unless otherwise specified in an NIH 
solicitation, internet addresses (URLs) should not be used to provide 
information necessary to the review because reviewers are under no obligation 
to view the Internet sites.  Reviewers are cautioned that their anonymity may 
be compromised when they directly access an Internet site.

APPLICATION PROCEDURES 

The research grant application form PHS 398 (rev. 4/98) is to be used in 
applying for these grants.  These forms are available at most institutional 
offices of sponsored research, on the Internet at 
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html, and from the 
Division of Extramural Outreach and Information Resources, National 
Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, MSC 7910, Bethesda, MD 20892-
7910, telephone 301-710-0267, E-mail: Grantsinfo@nih.gov.

Application Instructions

Applications for the Population Research Infrastructure Program (R24) grant 
should be prepared according to the Application Guidelines available at 
http://www.nichd.nih.gov/rfa/hd-00-011/hd-00-011.htm and from program staff 
listed under INQUIRIES.  All instructions and guidelines accompanying the PHS 
398 are to be followed, with the exception of the sections modified by these 
guidelines. 

Submission Instructions

The RFA label available in the PHS 398 application form must be stapled to 
the bottom of the face page of the application and must display the RFA 
number HD-00-011.  A sample RFA label is available at 
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/label-bk.pdf.  Please note this 
is in the pdf format.  Failure to use this label could result in delayed 
processing of the application such that it may not reach the review committee 
in time for review.  In addition, the RFA title (“Population Research 
Infrastructure Program”) and number (HD-00-011) must be typed on line 2 of 
the face page and the YES box must be marked.

Submit a signed typewritten original of the application, including the 
checklist, and three signed photocopies, in one package to:

CENTER FOR SCIENTIFIC REVIEW
NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH
6701 ROCKLEDGE DRIVE, ROOM 1040, MSC 7710
BETHESDA, MD 20892-7710
BETHESDA, MD 20817 (for express/courier service)

At the time of submission, two additional copies of the application should be 
sent to:

L. R. Stanford, Ph.D.
Division of Scientific Review
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5E01, MSC 7510
Bethesda, MD  20892-7510
Rockville, MD  20852 (for express/courier service)

Applications must be received by October 17, 2000.  If an application is 
received after that date, it will be returned to the applicant without 
review.

The Center for Scientific Review (CSR) will not accept any application in 
response to this RFA that is essentially the same as one currently pending 
initial review, unless the applicant withdraws the pending application.  The 
CSR will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one 
already reviewed.  This does not preclude the submission of substantial 
revisions of applications already reviewed, but such applications must 
include an introduction addressing the previous critique.

REVIEW CONSIDERATIONS

Upon receipt, applications will be reviewed for completeness by the CSR and 
for responsiveness to this RFA by the NICHD.  Incomplete and/or non- 
responsive applications will be returned to the applicant without further 
consideration.  Applications that are complete and responsive to the RFA will 
be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate peer review 
group convened by the NICHD in accordance with the review criteria stated 
below.  Although site visits may be conducted in selected cases, applicants 
should anticipate that no site visit will be conducted and ensure that their 
applications are complete at the time of submission.  As part of the initial 
merit review, all applications will receive a written critique and may 
undergo a process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest 
scientific merit will be discussed, assigned a priority score, and receive a 
second level review by the National Advisory Child Health and Human 
Development Council.

Review Criteria

Overall Program:

Five primary criteria will be used to evaluate the overall scientific merit 
of an application for the Population Research Infrastructure Program.  

o Quality of the scientific program and its impact on the field:  Reviewers 
will consider the significance, innovation, and quality of current and recent 
contributions of program scientists.  Have these contributions resulted in 
the production of new knowledge and/or new approaches to research that have 
significantly expanded, improved or altered the content, methods, and 
direction of population research?

o Quality and potential impact of proposed infrastructure program:  Reviewers 
will examine the overall quality, scientific merit, and innovation of the 
activities to be supported.  Reviewers will consider the likelihood that, 
based on existing capabilities and proposed activities, the proposed program 
will enhance population research, promote new research directions, facilitate 
interactions across disciplines and substantive areas of study, and advance 
theoretical or technical approaches. 

o Research competence of key personnel:  Reviewers will consider the 
capability and scientific credentials of the Principal Investigator to direct 
the Program and maintain high standards of research collaboration, the 
specific technical qualifications of core directors, and the scientific 
accomplishments of all participating investigators.

o Institutional commitment and environment:  The nature and level of resource 
commitment from the institution in which the center is housed and any 
cooperating institutions.  Institutional commitment will be evaluated 
relative to the institutional context.  Reviewers also will consider the 
academic and physical environment as it bears on research opportunities, 
space, equipment, and the potential for interaction with scientists from 
various departments, institutions or disciplines.

o Cost-efficiency of proposed infrastructure program in relation to the goals 
of this RFA.

Infrastructure Support Components:

Individual elements of the proposed infrastructure program, including 
Research Support Cores, Developmental Infrastructure, Translational Cores, 
and Cooperative Infrastructure, will be evaluated separately with respect to 
their contribution to enhancing the productivity of the existing scientific 
program, fostering new scientific opportunities, and enhancing the impact of 
unit research.  Review criteria applicable to all to categories of 
infrastructure support are:

o appropriateness to the size and characteristics of the existing scientific 
portfolio and the goals of the program; 

o potential or actual contribution of the proposed core or activity to 
advancing research within and/or beyond the applicant unit;

o quality and cost-effectiveness of services or activities;

o qualifications, experience, and commitment to the program of the 
investigators responsible for the core units or activities and their ability 
to devote the required time and effort to the program;

o appropriateness given other sources of support within the institution and 
center; and

o appropriateness of the budgetary requests.

In addition, the following criteria will be applied to specific types of 
infrastructure support:

o For seed grant programs proposed under “Developmental Infrastructure, the 
appropriateness and quality of program guidelines and provisions for a 
competitive, peer-reviewed, allocation of funds.  Upon renewal, seed grant 
programs will be reviewed for their success in developing funded research 
projects relevant to the mission of DBSB.  

o For Translational Cores, the significance of the proposed activity; its 
potential for the dissemination of population research and data and/or the 
translation of research into clinical applications and policy-relevant 
information tools.

o For Cooperative Infrastructure, the value added to the scientific program 
of the center
by the involvement of other institutions; the appropriateness and adequacy of 
plans for the sharing of rights and responsibilities among proposed partners 
with respect to the  funding, administration, and use of shared resources.

o For applications proposing “coordination activities” as defined under 
“Categories of Infrastructure Support,” the potential of the proposed 
activities for promoting communication, dissemination, and/or cost-
efficiencies among centers of population research.

Research Projects:

The goals of NIH-supported research are to advance our understanding of 
biological systems, improve the control of disease, and enhance health.  In 
the written comments, reviewers will be asked to discuss the following 
aspects of each project in order to judge the likelihood that the proposed 
research will have a substantial impact on the pursuit of these goals.  Each 
of the criteria listed below will be addressed and considered in assigning 
the score for a research project, weighting them as appropriate for each 
project.  Note that the project does not need to be strong in all categories 
to be judged likely to have major scientific impact and thus deserve a high 
priority score.  For example, an investigator may propose to carry out 
important work that by its nature is not innovative but is essential to move 
a field forward.  

(1) Significance.  Does this study address an important problem? If the aims 
of the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge be advanced?  
What will be the effect of these studies on the concepts or methods that 
drive this field?

(2) Approach.  Are the conceptual framework, design, methods, and analyses 
adequately developed, well-integrated, and appropriate to the aims of the 
project?  Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider 
alternative tactics?

(3) Innovation.  Does the project employ novel concepts, approaches or 
method?  Are the aims original and innovative?  Does the project challenge 
existing paradigms or develop new methodologies or technologies?

(4) Investigator.  Is the investigator appropriately trained and well suited 
to carry out this work?  Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience 
level of the Principal Investigator and other researchers (if any)?

(5)  Environment.  Does the scientific environment in which the work will be 
done contribute to the probability of success?  Do the proposed experiments 
take advantage of unique features of the scientific environment or employ 
useful collaborative arrangements?  Is there evidence of institutional 
support?

In addition, each proposed research project will be evaluated with respect 
to:

o  the contribution of the project to advancing the unit’s core or 
“signature” scientific objectives and the extent to which it embodies 
innovative, collaborative, and/or cross-cutting elements of the unit.

In addition to the above criteria, in accordance with NIH policy, all 
individual scientific projects will be reviewed with respect to the 
following:

o  The adequacy of plans to include both genders, minorities and their 
subgroups, and children as appropriate for the scientific goals of the 
research.  Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects also will be 
evaluated.

o  The reasonableness of the proposed budget and duration in relation to the 
proposed research.

o The adequacy of the proposed protection for humans, animals or the 
environment, to the extent they may be adversely affected by the project 
proposed in the application.

SCHEDULE
Letter of Intent Receipt Date:    August 15, 2000
Application Receipt Date:         October 17, 2000
Peer Review Date:                 April 2001
Council Review:                   June 2001
Earliest Anticipated Start Date:  July 1, 2001

AWARD CRITERIA

Applications will compete for available funds with all other applications 
that are submitted in response to this RFA.  Selection of applications for 
award, and the levels of support provided, will be based on 1) scientific and 
technical merit of the proposed project and components as determined by peer 
review; 2) program priorities and program balance; and 3) availability of 
funds.  Within applications recommended for funding, specific infrastructure 
components may be funded selectively. 

INQUIRIES

Inquiries concerning this RFA are encouraged.  The opportunity to clarify any 
issues or respond to questions from potential applicants is welcome.  
Researchers considering an application in response to this RFA are strongly 
encouraged to discuss their ideas with DBSB staff in advance of formal 
submission.

Direct inquiries regarding programmatic issues to:

Dr. Christine Bachrach
Demographic and Behavioral Sciences Branch, CPR
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 8B07, MSC 7510
Bethesda, MD  20892-7510
Rockville, MD  20852 (for express/courier service)
Telephone:  (301) 496-9485
FAX:  (301) 496-0962
Email: cbachrach@nih.gov (email communication preferred)

Direct inquiries regarding fiscal and administrative matters to:

Ms. Mary Ellen Colvin  
Grants Management Branch
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 8A17G, MSC 7510
Bethesda, MD  20892-7510
Telephone:  (301) 496-1304
Email:  mc113b@nih.gov 

AUTHORITY AND REGULATIONS

This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 
93.864 (Population Research).  Awards made are under authorization of 
Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act, as amended (42 USC 241 
and 284) and administered under NIH grant policies and Federal Regulations, 
42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92.  This program is not subject to 
the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or to 
Health Systems Agency review.

The PHS strongly encourages all grant and contract recipients to provide a 
smoke-free workplace and promote the non-use of all tobacco products.  In 
addition, Public Law 103-227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking 
in certain facilities (or in some cases, any portion of a facility) in which 
regular or routine education, library, day care, health care, or early 
childhood development services are provided to children.  This is consistent 
with the PHS mission to protect and advance the physical and mental health of 
the American people.

Return to Volume Index

Return to NIH Guide Main Index

	Office of Extramural Research (OER)			National Institutes of Health (NIH) 9000 Rockville Pike Bethesda, Maryland 20892			Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.