EXPIRED
INSTITUTIONAL PATHWAYS TOWARDS STRENGTHENING HIV PREVENTION IN
MINORITY COMMUNITIES
Release Date: September 20, 2001
RFA: RFA-HD-01-017
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
(http://www.nichd.nih.gov)
National Institute of Mental Health
(http://www.nimh.nih.gov)
National Institute of Nursing Research
(http://www.ninr.nih.gov/)
Letter of Intent Receipt Date: December 17, 2001
Application Receipt Date: January 18, 2002
THIS RFA USES "MODULAR GRANT" AND "JUST-IN-TIME" CONCEPTS. MODULAR
INSTRUCTIONS MUST BE USED FOR RESEARCH GRANT APPLICATIONS REQUESTING LESS
THAN $250,000 PER YEAR IN ALL YEARS. MODULAR BUDGET INSTRUCTIONS ARE PROVIDED
IN SECTION C OF THE PHS 398 (REVISION 5/2001) AVAILABLE AT
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html.
PURPOSE
Scientists concerned with HIV prevention are increasingly recognizing the
influence of the social environment on individual risk behaviors. However,
the design of prevention strategies that effectively harness environmental
influences has lagged behind this important insight. This RFA seeks to
expand our understanding of a major feature of the community environment -
local community institutions such as churches, voluntary organizations,
workplaces, and commercial establishments - and to explore the roles that
such community institutions play in contributing to or impeding HIV
prevention. The RFA seeks research to examine the potential mechanisms
through which local institutions can enhance prevention efforts, beyond
providing the venue for individual-level interventions. This announcement is
the first phase of a larger initiative to develop innovative intervention
approaches that effectively involve local community institutions in HIV
prevention. This initial RFA solicits Exploratory/Development Grant (R21)
applications for formative research designed to create a body of data that
will inform the design and evaluation of such innovative approaches.
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, 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. Faith-based organizations are eligible to apply for
these grants. 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)
Exploratory/Developmental Grant (R21) award mechanism. Responsibility for
the planning, direction, and execution of the proposed project will be solely
that of the applicant. This RFA is a one-time solicitation. The objective of
the Exploratory/Developmental Grant (R21) mechanism is to encourage
applications from individuals who are interested in testing innovative or
conceptually creative ideas that are scientifically sound and may advance our
understanding of how community-level institutions such as faith based
organizations, commercial organizations and work sites influence HIV risk and
prevention among their constituencies. The exploratory/developmental
mechanism of grant support is intended to enable an investigator to explore
the feasibility of an innovative research question or approach. Thus,
preliminary data specific to the proposed project are not expected, but
evidence supporting feasibility is desirable.
Specific application instructions have been modified to reflect "MODULAR
GRANT" and "JUST-IN-TIME" streamlining efforts that have been adopted by the
NIH. Complete and detailed instructions and information on Modular Grant
applications have been incorporated into the PHS 398 (rev. 5/2001).
Additional information on Modular Grants can be found at
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm
FUNDS AVAILABLE
NICHD intends to commit approximately $2 million in total costs [Direct plus
Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs] in FY 2002 to fund six to ten new
grants in response to this RFA. NINR intends to commit approximately $750,000
in total costs to fund one or two new grants to Principal Investigators who
are nurses or scientists from schools of nursing. NIMH intends to commit
approximately $250,000 to fund one new grant. An applicant may request a
project period of up to three years and a budget for direct costs of up to
$200,000 per year. Because the nature and scope of the research proposed may
vary, it is anticipated that the size of each award will also vary. Although
the financial plans of NICHD, NIMH, and NINR 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.
The award is not renewable.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
Background
When community institutions are involved in HIV prevention, they may engage
in activities such as providing educational interventions, distributing
condoms, sponsoring community outreach activities such as street ministries
or public awareness campaigns, or coordinating with other community
organizations in service-delivery or fund-raising activities. These
community-level activities are critically important components of national
AIDS prevention strategies, and have been supported by government and private
funding agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, NIH,
SAMSHA, as well as by foundations and other civic and religious
organizations.
Despite the impressive involvement of many community institutions in
prevention activities, little research exists that systematically examines
the diverse ways in which these organizations can contribute to HIV
prevention and the factors that make them effective or ineffective in doing
so. This initiative seeks to build a body of basic social science knowledge
that will lead to innovative and effective approaches to HIV prevention by
expanding thinking on how community institutions affect HIV risk and
prevention.
For purposes of this initiative, an institution is defined as a formal
organization that is located in a community, engaged with community
residents, and focused around a mission or activity. Examples of community
institutions include churches, grocery stores, schools, and voluntary
associations. Institutions have formal structures, usually involving a
hierarchy headed by a leader who directs what the institution does and acts
as a gatekeeper. Institutions also have procedures, rules, and rituals that
are part of their culture. Institutions embody norms and values, both in
their mission and in their structure and operation. Institutions have
constituent groups they serve, benefit from, and depend upon. Institutions
depend on in-kind or financial resources for survival, and obtain these
resources from a variety of sources including individual members, customers,
clients, other organizations, and government or private agencies.
Institutions, as structures, have a certain amount of inertia, but because
they are fundamentally social creations, they must constantly respond to the
changing nature and needs of their constituent groups in order to survive.
Thus, they may evolve and re-create themselves over time. Also, institutions
have relationships with other institutions, relationships that may reflect
shared norms and interests or conflicting values and goals. Institutions at
the local or community level may be embedded in an institutional hierarchy,
for example, a church that belongs to a larger denomination. Institutions
are influenced by many aspects of their context - the institutional hierarchy
in which they are embedded (and the norms and expectations that hierarchy
sets for them) - and by the community context as well. These must be
reconciled in some way in the institution’s norms, operation, and activities.
The methods by which institutions influence individuals health and other
behaviors have been described by a number of theoretical approaches,
including but not limited to social capital theories, social network
theories, diffusion theories, and systems theories. They are thought to
operate by attaching people to services, bringing meaning to lives,
empowering, and strengthening families and communities. They can also act as
controls on behavior, supporting and shaping social norms. They can affect
the resources that individuals are able to bring to bear on preventing
illness, protecting health, and responding to illness. In addition,
institutions can provide direct health services and resources, sponsor
disease screening, or provide health insurance of various sorts to all or
selected members of groups connected to the institution. Or, institutions -
intentionally or unintentionally - can provide the opportunity for risk
behavior.
To be effective, HIV prevention efforts must reach people at high risk for
infection and those who are already infected. To the extent that such
individuals are disconnected from mainstream institutions (e.g., faith-based
organizations, schools or voluntary organizations), community institutions
may be challenged to effectively engage in HIV prevention efforts. This
initiative seeks research to explore such challenges by examining: (1) the
ways in which individuals who are potentially at high risk for HIV connect
with community institutions, (2) how the norms and practices of community
institutions may affect HIV risk and prevention, either negatively or
positively, (3) how institutions initiate and/or maintain connections with
potentially at-risk individuals and help to strengthen their ability to avoid
risk, (4) how community institutions can effectively reach HIV-positive and
at-risk individuals and engage them in effective prevention interventions,
and (5) what characterizes institutions that are able to contribute
effectively to HIV prevention, either individually or in cooperation with
other organizations.
Research Scope
The RFA solicits exploratory, collaborative, multidisciplinary research to
better understand the ways in which the structure and dynamics of community
institutions influence HIV prevention and the ways in which individuals at
high risk of HIV infection or infected with HIV are linked to community
institutions. These exploratory studies are intended to lay the groundwork
for (a) interventions at the institutional level, and (b) expanded,
theoretically driven studies of the role of institutions in HIV prevention.
The RFA focuses on minority communities in the U.S. because of their
disproportionate risk of HIV.
The objective of this RFA is to create a body of data to guide the design,
implementation, and evaluation of future interventions and prevention
strategies. Funded research will help to explore the potential for novel
approaches to involving various types of community institutions or
strengthening their impact on HIV risk behaviors, both within their own
constituents as well as more broadly in the community. This announcement
seeks applications for formative or exploratory research.
An important goal of these exploratory grants will be to develop and refine
specific causal models (sometimes called logic models ), based in theory and
observation, that describe the mechanisms through which interventions and
strategies at the institutional level or involving community institutions are
expected to contribute to HIV prevention. Subsequent stages of this
initiative, if implemented, would provide support for testing these models
through experimental designs and/or fully developed observational studies.
This RFA calls for a focus on institutions at the community level,
institutions that have ongoing, quantifiable, and direct interaction with at
least some proportion of community members. Applicants who propose research
involving specific community institutions must provide information on the
history, mission, constituency, funding, and structure of the institution, as
well as evidence of the institution’s commitment to engaging actively with
the research project. Investigators are encouraged to focus on types of
community institutions that have not regularly been involved in HIV
prevention efforts. However, an application may also address: (1)
cooperative arrangements involving institutions that are and are not
experienced in HIV prevention, and/or (2) institutional or contextual factors
and approaches that enhance the effectiveness with which experienced
community institutions address HIV risk and prevention.
The research proposed must be informed by clearly articulated theory
regarding both HIV prevention and institutional development, change, and
influence. This RFA does not point to any particular theory or theories.
Potentially applicable theories relating to institutions include, but are not
limited to, the following: theories of social stratification, organizational
theories, feminist theory, functionalist theories, new institutionalist
theories, ecological theories, political economic theories. It is hoped that
research carried out under this initiative will contribute to the further
development of theory regarding the role of community institutions in HIV
prevention.
Researchers are encouraged to consider a full range of appropriate
qualitative and quantitative methods in designing their research.
Multidisciplinary approaches are encouraged. Applicants may consider the
involvement of a wide range of scientists, including but not limited to those
who study religion, institutional organization, service delivery, behavior
change, persuasive communication, and community organization and dynamics.
Anthropologists, geographers, economists, political scientists,
psychologists, and sociologists all might have skills of use in developing
these studies. Each research team must include significant, substantive
involvement of individuals from the institution or institutions to be the
focus of the study.
Relevant research questions include, but are not limited to:
o How are individuals who are HIV-positive or potentially at high risk for
HIV connected with community institutions of various types? What potential
but unexplored mechanisms exist for effectively reaching such individuals?
What are the spatial and social relations of HIV risk groups and how might
these guide institution-based prevention efforts?
o How can community institutions effectively reach HIV-positive and at-risk
individuals and engage them in effective prevention interventions? How can
institutions effectively link provision of care with prevention? Is this an
effective strategy for reaching vulnerable populations?
o What are the mechanisms through which community institutions influence
health and well being, generally, and health behaviors and HIV risk and
protection specifically?
o How do institutions maintain connections with potentially at-risk
individuals and help to strengthen their ability to avoid risk?
o How do institutions shape and enforce community norms relevant to HIV risk?
How does this differ by type, structure of institution, relationships among
institutions, or community context?
o In what ways do community institutions impede effective HIV prevention?
What factors are responsible for such barriers and how can they be addressed?
o What characteristics of institutional norms, structure, operation, and
activities are associated with effective HIV prevention in particular
communities and settings?
o What is the role of institutional leaders and gatekeepers in creating and
sustaining effective prevention efforts? How does institutional involvement
in HIV prevention that is initiated by an individual leader at a given
institution become institutionalized?
o How do institutions network with other community actors and other
institutions? When and how do such connections and collaborations improve
HIV prevention efforts? When and how do they fail to do so?
o What effects do various forms of instability that affect community
institutions, their constituencies, and their relations with other
organizations have on HIV prevention efforts? Examples of instability include
storefront churches that move to new locations, urban renewal that displaces
the populations served by institutions, and coalitions that form and dissolve
in response to specific funding opportunities.
o How does conflict within and between community institutions over norms and
intervention strategies, e.g., zero tolerance of certain behaviors VS so-
called harm reduction approaches, affect prevention efforts?
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
o Funding under this RFA is intended to support work that will lead to
innovative interventions and prevention strategies. Research supported must
either lay the groundwork for further in-depth and basic research to inform
or guide the development of practical and effective HIV prevention strategies
at the community level, or develop a specific intervention strategy.
o Applications that propose to conduct research leading to the development
and testing of interventions must provide a plan for addressing issues
relating to ongoing sustainability of such interventions at the end of the
research period.
o Applications must present detailed descriptions of past, current and
planned collaborations with the community institutions named as participants
in the study. This is to include descriptions of the mechanisms planned to
ensure successful cooperation.
o Applications must include funds in the budget for an annual two-day
meeting of grantees in the Washington DC area.
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 is 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.
REQUIRED EDUCATION ON THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECT PARTICIPANTS
NIH policy requires education on the protection of human subject participants
for all investigators submitting NIH proposals for research involving human
subjects. This policy announcement is found in the NIH Guide for Grants and
Contracts Announcement dated June 5, 2000, at the following website:
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-039.html.
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.
PUBLIC ACCESS TO RESEARCH DATA THROUGH THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110 has been revised to
provide public access to research data through the Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) under some circumstances. Data that are (1) first produced in a
project that is supported in whole or in part with Federal funds and (2)
cited publicly and officially by a Federal agency in support of an action
that has the force and effect of law (i.e., a regulation) may be accessed
through FOIA. It is important for applicants to understand the basic scope of
this amendment. NIH has provided guidance at:
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/a110/a110_guidance_dec1999.htm.
Applicants may wish to place data collected under this RFA in a public
archive, which can provide protections for the data and manage the
distribution for an indefinite period of time. If so, the application should
include a description of the archiving plan in the study design and include
information about this in the budget justification section of the
application. In addition, applicants should think about how to structure
informed consent statements and other human subjects procedures given the
potential for wider use of data collected under this award.
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
plan the review.
The letter of intent is to be sent to Dr. Susan Newcomer at the address
listed under INQUIRIES, below, by December 17, 2001.
APPLICATION PROCEDURES
The PHS 398 research grant application instructions and forms (rev. 5/2001)
at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html are to be used in
applying for these grants. Beginning January 10, 2002, the NIH will return
applications that are not submitted on the 5/2001 version. For further
assistance contact GrantsInfo, Telephone 301-710-0267, Email:
[email protected].
SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR MODULAR GRANT APPLICATIONS
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. 5/2001) at
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html is to be used in
applying for these grants, with modular budget instructions provided in
Section C of the application instructions.
Submission Instructions
The RFA label available in the PHS 398 (rev. 5/2001) application form must be
affixed to the bottom of the face page of the application. Type the RFA
number on the label. 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. The RFA label is also available at:
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/label-bk.pdf.
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:
Robert Stretch, Ph.D.
Acting Director, Division of Scientific Review
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
6100 Executive Blvd, Room 5E03, MSC 7510
Bethesda, MD 20892-7510
Rockville, MD 20852 (for express/courier service)
Applications must be received by January 18, 2002. 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 by the NICHD, NINR and NIMH. 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 Division of 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 may 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, the National Advisory
Mental Health Council or the National Advisory Nursing 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
their 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
methods? 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 nature and adequacy of cooperative arrangements involving community
level institutions.
o The adequacy of the proposed plan for addressing issues relating to ongoing
sustainability of proposed interventions.
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 or the environment, to
the extent they may be adversely affected by the project proposed in the
application.
Schedule
Letter of Intent Receipt Date: December 17, 2001
Application Receipt Date: January 18, 2002
Peer Review Date: March/April 2002
Council Review: June 2002
Earliest Anticipated Start Date: August 2002
AWARD CRITERIA
Criteria that will be used to make award decisions include:
o scientific 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. A complete
listing of contacts for both programmatic and fiscal/administrative inquiries
may be found at: http://www.nichd.nih.gov/rfa/HD-01-017.htm.
AUTHORITY AND REGULATIONS
This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Nos.
93.864 (NICHD, Population Research), 93.361 (NINR), 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® |
||||||