and Human Services (HHS)
EXPIRED
THE INFLUENCE OF GENDER ON HIV RISK Release Date: November 28, 2000 RFA: HD-01-002 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (http://www.nichd.nih.gov) National Institute of Mental Health (http://www.nimh.nih.gov) Letter of Intent Receipt Date: January 6, 2001 Application Receipt Date: March 22, 2001 THIS RFA USES THE MODULAR GRANT AND JUST-IN-TIME CONCEPTS. IT INCLUDES DETAILED MODIFICATIONS TO STANDARD APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS THAT MUST BE USED WHEN PREPARING APPLICATIONS IN RESPONSE TO THIS RFA. PURPOSE Social and cultural understandings of gender exert powerful influences on human behavior, particularly in the domain of sexuality. Differences in male and female sexual behavior are in part biologically based, but much of the variation in individual and couple sexual behavior emerges from socially and culturally determined understandings of what is appropriate for and expected of males and females. In the present context of the AIDS epidemic, where sexual interactions may have deleterious consequences, these gendered expectations and attitudes are particularly salient. Few studies, however, have specifically undertaken the task of relating the impact of gender on AIDS risk. This Request for Applications (RFA) seeks research that will contribute to a better understanding of how gender influences the risk of HIV infection through sexual behaviors, and of how HIV risks rooted in gendered expectations and behaviors may be best reduced. 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 Request for Applications (RFA) is related to one or more 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 and foreign, 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. Racial/ethnic minority individuals, women, and persons with disabilities are encouraged to apply as Principal Investigators. MECHANISM OF SUPPORT This RFA will use the National Institutes of Health (NIH) individual research project grant (R01) award mechanism. Responsibility for the planning, direction, and execution of the proposed project will be solely that of the applicant. The total project period for an application submitted in response to this RFA may not exceed five years. This RFA is a one-time solicitation. Future unsolicited competing continuation applications will compete with all investigator-initiated applications and be reviewed according to the customary peer review procedures. The anticipated award date is September 2001. Specific application instructions have been modified to reflect MODULAR GRANT and JUST-IN-TIME streamlining efforts being examined by the NIH. Complete and detailed instructions and information on Modular Grant applications can be found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm. FUNDS AVAILABLE The NICHD intends to commit approximately $1 million in total costs [direct plus Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs] in FY 2001 to fund six to eight new and/or competing continuation applications in response to this RFA. The NIMH intends to commit approximately $500,000 in total costs [direct plus Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs] in FY 2001 to fund one to three new and/or competing continuation applications in response to this RFA. An applicant may request a project period of up to five years. Applicants considering submitting budget requests in the $300,000 to $500,000 range are encouraged to discuss their plans with the NICHD or NIMH program officer named under INQUIRIES, below. Because the nature and scope of the research proposed may vary, it is anticipated that the size of each award will also vary. In general, direct cost requests are expected to fall within the range of $100,000 to $300,000. Although the financial plans of the NICHD and the NIMH 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. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES Background For purposes of this RFA, we refer to sex as the biological differentiation of male and female. We use gender to refer to the set of ideas shared by people belonging to a given group or society regarding what it means to be male or female. These include ideas about how men and women look, think, and behave, expectations and values about how they should look, think, and behave, both separately and together, and conceptions about the place of each sex within the social order. Gender includes concepts of masculinity or femininity which denote what types of characteristics and behaviors make someone male or female. Gendered norms and expectations are social or cultural phenomena, in that they are negotiated and shared among a group of people. However, they also operate at the individual level, in the form of an individual’s own gendered attitudes, expectations, and behaviors. Gendered norms and expectations are reinforced or may evolve as a result of interplay between action at the individual and social levels. For example, a man who violates conventional gender expectations by wearing his hair long may meet with censure and avoidance, and/or may contribute towards changing the convention that long hair is inappropriate for men. Although gender norms and expectations may, under some circumstances, exhibit substantial continuity, they also vary across time, cultures, and socioeconomic groups. Even within national boundaries, wide variations may exist within racial and ethnic groups. Immigrants bring perceptions of men’s and women’s responsibilities and behavior from their culture of origin, which may or may not blend with the gender beliefs of their new society. Expectations for gendered behavior also may be context-specific, depending on whether one is with members of the same or opposite sex, at work or on a date, and, within couples, on a variety of factors including type of relationship (marital, casual, paid sex-worker, and same-sex versus heterosexual relationships). The social and cultural processes that determine how gendered norms and expectations evolve are still incompletely understood. At the societal level, they are clearly influenced by the historical interplay of economic, political, and social forces. For example, the movement of women into the labor force in most industrialized countries has been linked to a wide variety of factors. These include the wartime necessity to involve women in factory work, falling fertility rates and rising divorce rates, increasing education for women, the passage of laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex, and the ideas promulgated by the women’s movement. Institutions, including religious organizations, workplaces, schools, media, and governments, play an important role in reinforcing or changing gender norms. Norms, attitudes, and beliefs also evolve through social interaction within and across social networks defined by ties such as friendship, residential proximity, work, and kinship. Various factors may also influence gender development and attitudes at the individual level, including family, peers, socioeconomic status, religion, and the media. Attitudes and perception of gender may also be influenced by an individual’s biology (e.g., hormonal influences) and by his/her life experiences. Gendered norms, expectations, and behaviors are central to HIV risk primarily because of their influence on sexual behavior. Attitudes and behaviors relating to partner selection, sexual activity, contraceptive use, fidelity, and marriage are all highly colored by gender. Below, we highlight some aspects of gender involved with the risk and transmission of HIV and AIDS. o Gender roles, or societal expectations regarding how men and women behave and function, may play a role in HIV risk dynamics. For example, in some societies men are assumed to have the right to decide whether and when to have sex, regardless of the woman’s wishes. In some situations, young women are expected to control sexual situations, and blamed if they are unable to do so. Expectations of sexual fidelity often differ by sex, putting one or the other partner at greater risk of infection. o Personal gender ideologies may influence sexual behavior as individuals seek to act in ways that are consistent with their concepts of masculinity or femininity (also referred to as gender display). For example, condom use may be promoted by ideas of masculinity that include the importance of protecting one’s partner. Satisfaction with one’s partner or relationship may be easier to maintain if both partners gender ideologies emphasize the value of commitment. The introduction of condoms into an ongoing relationship may signal a change in that commitment. Men who believe that risk-taking is an expression of masculinity may be more likely to engage in high-risk sexual and drug-using behaviors. o Gender-based power differentials can influence the risk of unprotected intercourse. Some examples may be found in coercive sex, a woman’s unwillingness to demand condom use, or a wife’s inability to refuse sex with an infected partner. Power differentials are often linked to economic factors, and can often be traced to disparities in income and earning potential between the sexes and structural or normative conditions that limit the economic autonomy of women. In many areas of high HIV prevalence, women work as sex workers despite the risk of infection because of economic necessity. Other sources of power differentials include age differences and cultural norms that assign members of one sex a subservient position. To the extent that sexual networks may be heterogeneous with respect to social and cultural constructions of gender, the dynamics of achieving protection from HIV risk may be complicated. The expectations and beliefs one person holds may not coincide with those of a partner, or of a larger network. When these differences result in unshared assumptions between partners, they may increase risk of HIV. Previous Research Research over the last 25 years on the meanings of masculinity and femininity and other aspects of gender has laid a scientific foundation for an enhanced research effort to understand the impact of gendered expectations and gender dynamics on sexual behaviors related to HIV risk. Varying theories and perspectives on gender and gender roles have been proposed. A recent burgeoning of quantitative and qualitative research on topics related to gender provides an important basis for research on sexuality. For example, research has found that teenaged males in the U.S. with traditional attitudes toward gender roles have more sex partners, less condom use, a less intimate relationship with their last partner (Pleck, Sonenstein, and Ku 1993), and are more likely to interpret women’s courtship/dating behavior as sexual (Kowalski 1993). Gender may also be a determinant in partner selection. Individuals tend to form a couple with those who possess similar gender-related attitudes (Aube and Koestner 1995). Underlying all of the findings mentioned, however, is the fact that the research has focused on United States participants with gender norms implicitly based on U.S. culture. Because there are cultural variations of gender that exist between societies, the treatment and behavior of men and women are, to a great extent, dictated by cultural attitudes and practices that are developed, passed on, and altered by historical events and economic needs. For example, the women’s movement of the 1960s in the United States modified traditional gender roles, in turn lessening the stigma of stay-at- home dads and working moms. To the contrary, the Taliban in Afghanistan indoctrinated beliefs whereby men and women must strictly adhere to traditional gender roles. Cultural sensitivity is, therefore, of the utmost importance in an examination of gender differences. Research Scope This RFA invites research that will contribute to a better understanding of how gender influences the risk of HIV infection through sexual behaviors, and of how HIV risks rooted in gendered expectations and behaviors best may be reduced. The ultimate goal of the research is the identification of strategies to reduce the spread of HIV and applicants should justify the significance of the proposed research in relation to this goal. Applicants may propose basic or intervention research, and research in either domestic or international settings. Proposed research should be well grounded in theory. Research that combines qualitative and quantitative measurement strategies may be particularly well suited to the goals of this RFA. Illustrative research topics include, but are not limited to: Studies that examine the diversity of cultural understandings and gendered behaviors related to sexual risk of HIV within and across national, racial, and ethnic populations, particularly those with high or increasing prevalence of HIV. Studies that examine individual, social, cultural, and economic processes that create or modify gendered norms, expectations, and behaviors related to sexual risk of HIV. Studies that examine the influence of gender on some aspect of HIV-related sexual behavior. For example: o The contexts in which condoms are used. How do gender norms affect the ease of condom use in different types of relationships (e.g., temporary versus committed)? How does correct and consistent condom use in the context of an ongoing relationship vary in relation to which partner introduces it and when? o Partner acquisition and the stability and exclusivity of sexual relationships, acquisition of serial and simultaneous sexual partners. o Sexual networking and partner selection in men and women: How do gender and gender norms affect how men and women pursue partners, where and how they seek sex partners (work, bars, through social connections or dating services), and whom they choose as sex partners (prostitutes, friends, strangers)? o Initiation into risky sexual behaviors: What aspects of gender increase the risk of young men and women beginning to engage in sexual behaviors that could lead to HIV infection? Studies of social interactions between men and women and their impact on HIV risk. Studies of gender in relation to the consequences of HIV infection (the provision of or the expectation of support from others, stigma of having disease, consequences to relationship strength, access to treatment and care, use of health services). Conflict or coherence in attitudes toward sexual intercourse (in terms of partners, protection, power and pleasure) at the dyadic, group, and cultural level, and the implications of conflict or coherence for HIV risk. The effects of outside influences (religion, family, friends, media, work, etc.) on childhood/adolescent/adult development of gender roles and ideologies and how they shape one’s perception of AIDS, sexual experience, and risk behavior. Studies of the interplay of biological and social influences on gendered sexual behaviors (for example, decisions for sex, partner selection and exclusivity, condom use, risk behavior, perceptions of risk). Meanings of gender and gendered norms, expectations, and behaviors within gay and lesbian individuals and couples and their relation to AIDS risk perceptions and behavior. Studies of the role of gender in the development of strategies for reducing HIV risk and transmission. If expectations of behavior change are targeted disproportionately to one sex, what social, economic, political, and social processes influence this and what are the implications for HIV prevention? Intervention studies that target the role played by gender in influencing HIV-risk behaviors and the consequences of HIV infection. References Archer, John. 1989. The Relationship between Gender-Role Measures: A Review. British Journal of Social Psychology 28: 173-184. Aube, Jennifer and R. Koestner. 1995. Gender Characteristics and Relationship Adjustment: Another Look at Similarity-Complementarity Hypotheses. Journal of Personality 63(4): 879-904. DiBlasio, Frederick A. and B.B. Benda. 1992. Gender Difference in Theories of Adolescent Sexual Activity. Sex Roles 27(5/6): 221-239. Irvine, Janice M. 1990. From Difference to Sameness: Gender Ideology in Sexual Science. The Journal of Sex Research 27(1): 7-24. Kowalski, Robin M. 1993. Inferring Sexual Interest from Behavioral Cues: Effects of Gender and Sexually Relevant Attitudes. Sex Roles 29(1/2): 13- 36. Lorber, Judith. 1998. Gender Inequality: Feminist Theories and Politics. Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Co. Pleck, Joseph H, F.L. Sonenstein, and L.C. Ku. 1993. Masculinity Ideology: Its Impact on Adolescent Males Heterosexual Relationships. Journal of Social Issues 49(3): 11-29. Udry, JR. 1994. The Nature of Gender. Demography 31(4): 561-573. 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 sub-populations 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 indicating that inclusion is inappropriate with respect to the health of the subjects or the purpose of the research. This policy results from the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 (Section 492B of Public Law 103-43). All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the UPDATED NIH Guidelines for Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical Research, published in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts on August 2, 2000 (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-048.html), a complete copy of the updated Guidelines are available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_update.htm. The revisions relate to NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials and require: a) all applications or proposals and/or protocols to provide a description of plans to conduct analyses, as appropriate, to address differences by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic groups, including subgroups if applicable, and b) all investigators to report accrual, and to conduct and report analyses, as appropriate, by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic group differences. 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 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 on the Internet at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not98-024.html. Investigators also may obtain copies of these policies from the program staff listed under INQUIRIES. Program staff may also provide additional relevant information concerning the policy. 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. 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 NIH staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review. The letter of intent is to be sent to Dr. Susan Newcomer at the address listed under INQUIRIES, below, by January 6, 2001. 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 http://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: [email protected]. Application Instructions The modular grant concept establishes specific modules in which direct costs may be requested as well as a maximum level for requested budgets. Only limited budgetary information is required under this approach. The just-in- time concept allows applicants to submit certain information only when there is a possibility for an award. It is anticipated that these changes will reduce the administrative burden for the applicants, reviewers, and NIH staff. The research grant application form PHS 398 (rev. 4/98) is to be used in applying for these grants, with the modifications noted below. For this RFA, Modular Grant applications will request direct costs in $25,000 modules, up to a total direct cost request of $500,000 per year. The total direct costs must be requested in accordance with the program guidelines and the modifications made to the standard PHS 398 application instructions described below: o FACE PAGE: Items 7a and 7b should be completed, indicating Direct Costs (in $25,000 increments up to a maximum of $500,000) and Total Costs [Modular Total Direct plus Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs] for the initial budget period. Items 8a and 8b should be completed indicating the Direct and Total Costs for the entire proposed period of support. o DETAILED BUDGET FOR THE INITIAL BUDGET PERIOD: Do not complete Form Page 4 of the PHS 398. It is not required and will not be accepted with the application. o BUDGET FOR THE ENTIRE PROPOSED PERIOD OF SUPPORT: Do not complete the categorical budget table on Form Page 5 of the PHS 398. It is not required and will not be accepted with the application. o NARRATIVE BUDGET JUSTIFICATION: Prepare a Modular Grant Budget Narrative page. (See http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm for sample pages.) At the top of the page, enter the total direct costs requested for each year. This is not a Form Page. o Under Personnel, list ALL project personnel, including their names, percent of effort, and roles on the project. No individual salary information should be provided. However, the applicant should use the NIH appropriation language salary cap and the NIH policy for graduate student compensation in developing the budget request. For Consortium/Contractual costs, provide an estimate of total costs (direct plus F & A) for each year, each rounded to the nearest $1,000. List the individuals/organizations with whom consortium or contractual arrangements have been made, the percent effort of all personnel, and the role on the project. Indicate whether the collaborating institution is foreign or domestic. The total cost for a consortium/contractual arrangement is included in the overall requested modular direct cost amount. Include the Letter of Intent to establish a consortium. Provide an additional narrative budget justification for any variation in the number of modules requested. o BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH: The Biographical Sketch provides information used by reviewers in the assessment of each individual"s qualifications for a specific role in the proposed project, as well as to evaluate the overall qualifications of the research team. A biographical sketch is required for all key personnel, following the instructions below. No more than three pages may be used for each person. A sample biographical sketch may be viewed at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm. - Complete the educational block at the top of the form page, - List position(s) and any honors, - Provide information, including overall goals and responsibilities, on research projects ongoing or completed during the last three years, - List selected peer-reviewed publications, with full citations. o CHECKLIST: This page should be completed and submitted with the application. If the F&A rate agreement has been established, indicate the type of agreement and the date. All appropriate exclusions must be applied in the calculation of the F&A costs for the initial budget period and all future budget years. o The applicant should provide the name and telephone number of the individual to contact concerning fiscal and administrative issues if additional information is necessary following the initial review. Submission Instructions The RFA label available in the PHS 398 (rev. 4/98) application form must be stapled to the bottom of the face page of the application and must display the RFA number HD-01-002. A sample RFA label is available at http://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 and number must be typed on line 2 of the face page of the application form and the YES box must be marked. Submit a signed, typewritten original of the application, including the Checklist, and five 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) Applications must be received by March 22, 2001. 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 the RFA by the NICHD and NIMH. If the application is not responsive to the RFA, staff may contact the applicant to determine whether to return the application to the applicant or submit it for review in competition with unsolicited applications at the next review cycle. 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 Center for Scientific Review in accordance with the review criteria stated below. As part of the initial merit review, all applications will receive a written critique and undergo a process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific merit, generally the top half of the applications under review, will be discussed, assigned a priority score, and receive a second level review by the National Advisory Child Health and Human Development Council or the National Advisory Mental Health Council. Review Criteria The goals of NIH-supported research are to advance our understanding of biological systems, improve the control of disease, and enhance health. In the written comments reviewers will be asked to discuss the following aspects of the application in order to judge the likelihood that the proposed research will have a substantial impact on the pursuit of these goals. Each of these criteria will be addressed and considered in assigning the overall score, weighting them as appropriate for each application. Note that the application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact and thus deserve a high priority score. For example, an investigator may propose to carry out important work that by its nature is not innovative but is essential to move a field forward. (1) Significance: Does 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, applications will be evaluated with respect to: o The adequacy of the proposed plan to share data, if appropriate. In addition to the above criteria, in accordance with NIH policy, all applications will also 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 will also 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: January 6, 2001 Application Receipt Date: March 22, 2001 Peer Review Date: June/July 2001 Council Review: September 2001 Earliest Anticipated Start Date: September 2001 AWARD CRITERIA Criteria that will be used to make award decisions include: o scientific and technical merit (as determined by peer review) o availability of funds o programmatic priorities. INQUIRIES Inquiries concerning this RFA are encouraged. The opportunity to clarify any issues or answer questions from potential applicants is welcome. Direct inquiries regarding NICHD-related programmatic issues to: Susan Newcomer, Ph.D. Demographic and Behavioral Sciences Branch National Institute of Child Health and Human Development 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 8B07, MSC 7510 Bethesda, MD 20892-7510 Telephone: (301) 435-6981 E-mail: [email protected] Direct inquiries regarding NIMH-related programmatic issues to: Willo Pequegnat, Ph.D. Center for Mental Health Research on AIDS Division of Mental Disorders, Behavioral Research and AIDS National Institute of Mental Health 6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 6205, MSC 9619 Bethesda, MD 20892-9619 Telephone: (301) 443-1187 FAX: (301) 443-9719 E-mail: [email protected] Direct inquiries regarding NICHD-related fiscal and administrative matters to: 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) 496-5001 E-mail: [email protected] Direct inquiries regarding NIMH-related fiscal matters to: William F. Caputo Grants Management Branch National Institute of Mental Health 6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 6115, MSC 9605 Bethesda, MD 20892-9605 Telephone: (301) 443-0004 FAX: (301) 443-6885 E-mail: [email protected] Direct all inquiries regarding review issues to: Angela Pattatucci-Aragon, Ph.D. Center for Scientific Review 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5220 Bethesda, MD 20892 E-mail: [email protected] AUTHORITY AND REGULATIONS This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Nos. 93.864 (Population Research) and 93.121 and 93.242 (NIMH). Awards are made under authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and administered under NIH grants policies and Federal Regulations 42 CFR 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92. This program is not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health Systems Agency review. The PHS strongly encourages all grant 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.
Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) |
|
|||
|
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health® |
||||||