Department of Health and Human Services

Part 1. Overview Information

Participating Organization(s)

National Institutes of Health (NIH)

Components of Participating Organizations

Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)

All applications to this funding opportunity announcement should fall within the mission of the Institutes/Centers. The following NIH Offices may co-fund applications assigned to those Institutes/Centers.

Office of Research on Women's Health (ORWH)

Funding Opportunity Title
Community Engaged Research on Pregnancy Related and Associated Infections and Sepsis Morbidity and Mortality (UG3/UH3 Clinical Trial Optional)
Activity Code

UG3/UH3 Exploratory/Developmental Phased Award Cooperative Agreement

Announcement Type
Reissue of RFA-HD-21-033
Related Notices

None

Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Number
RFA-HD-22-024
Companion Funding Opportunity
None
Assistance Listing Number(s)
93.865, 93.313
Funding Opportunity Purpose

The purpose of this FOA is to support interdisciplinary community-engaged research designed to reduce or eliminate infections and sepsis as causes of pregnancy- related or associated morbidity and mortality (PRAMM) in the United States. This FOA is to support research primarily focused on PRAMM health disparities in areas with highest maternal morbidity and mortality.

This initiative utilizes the UG3/UH3 Phased Innovation Awards Cooperative Agreement and will be rolled out in 2 phases. Awards for the One Year UG3 phase will be used to demonstrate sufficient preparation, feasibility, and capacity to meet foundational milestones specific to the work proposed. Hypothesis driven objectives will be submitted for the UH3 phase. A UG3 project that meets its milestones will be administratively considered by NICHD and prioritized for transition to the UH3 award. Applicants responding to this FOA must address objectives for both the UG3 and UH3 phases.

Key Dates

Posted Date
January 21, 2022
Open Date (Earliest Submission Date)
March 18, 2022
Letter of Intent Due Date(s)

30 days prior to application receipt date

Application Due Dates Review and Award Cycles
New Renewal / Resubmission / Revision (as allowed) AIDS Scientific Merit Review Advisory Council Review Earliest Start Date
April 18, 2022 Not Applicable Not Applicable July 2022 August 2022 September 2022

All applications are due by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. 

Applicants are encouraged to apply early to allow adequate time to make any corrections to errors found in the application during the submission process by the due date.

Expiration Date
April 19, 2022
Due Dates for E.O. 12372

Not Applicable

Required Application Instructions

It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide,except where instructed to do otherwise (in this FOA or in a Notice from NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts ).

Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions.

Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.

Table of Contents

Part 2. Full Text of Announcement

Section I. Funding Opportunity Description

Purpose

This initiative will use a multi-phased approach to address one of the leading causes of maternal morbidity and mortality, infection and sepsis, especially in communities most at risk of PRAMM. In this UG3/UH3 phased initiative, applicants will be funded through specialized cooperative agreements to reduce disparities, prevent maternal mortality and develop interventions to reduce maternal morbidity through research that engages and partners with the affected communities, in all facets of research including design, implementation and analysis, and incorporates their needs and feedback into the research plan.

Background

Remarkable advances in perinatal care over the last 25 years in the United States have led to notable improvements in neonatal morbidity and mortality. In contrast, between 1987 and 2017, pregnancy-related mortality in the United States, defined as death during pregnancy or within one year of pregnancy from any cause related to or aggravated by pregnancy, increased from 7.2 to 17.3 pregnancy-related deaths per 100,000 live births. Among the leading causes of maternal morbidity and mortality in the United States are cardiovascular disease, hypertensive disorders, thromboembolism, hemorrhage, and infections. Research into the clinical causes of maternal morbidity and mortality has led to some improvements in the care of women during the antepartum period and labor and delivery; however, evidence suggests that up to 60% of maternal deaths in the United States could be prevented. Therefore, continued research investments are needed to identify and provide safe and effective prevention and treatment options for women.

Racial and ethnic minority women face substantially higher rates of pregnancy-related complications (i.e., severe maternal morbidity) and pregnancy-related death compared to non-Hispanic White women. Specifically, non-Hispanic Black and American Indian/Alaska Native women are 2 to 4 times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes compared to non-Hispanic White women. Moreover, African American/Black, Hispanic/Latina, Asian, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander, and American Indian/Alaska Native women all have higher incidence of severe maternal morbidity compared to White women. Maternal health disparities also occur based on age, with women over the age of 40 having a maternal mortality ratio almost 5 times that of the national average. Geography may also contribute to poor maternal outcomes; a recent evaluation of maternal mortality in Louisiana found that women living in maternity care deserts had a 91% increased risk of pregnancy-associated maternal death.

Researchers have made progress in understanding the epidemiology of racial and ethnic disparities in maternal mortality and morbidity. The primary contributing factors of these disparities, such as preconception health and site of care, are well-documented. However, disparities in maternal outcomes persist after controlling for patient characteristics (e.g., health behaviors, preconception health) and health care system factors (e.g., site and quality of care), suggesting that additional factors may be contributing to the high prevalence of maternal morbidity. For example, racial biases at the individual, community, institutional, and societal levels may play a role in perpetuating racial and ethnic disparities in maternal outcomes. Structural and organizational factors in the health care systems of ambulatory and hospital care and the availability of continuity of primary care in the preconception and postpartum periods may also be affecting maternal outcomes.

Between 2011 and 2016, infection or sepsis contributed to 12.5% of pregnancy-related maternal deaths. Sepsis is life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by infection and the host’s dysregulated response to infection. The main risk factors for maternal sepsis are cesarean delivery, prolonged rupture of membranes and prolonged labor. Other risk factors include obesity, diabetes, low socio-economic status, lack of access to prenatal care, poor nutrition, primiparity, anemia, and multiple gestation. The obstetric-related causes of sepsis include endometritis, wound infection after cesarean section or episiotomy, and abdominopelvic abscess. However, pregnant women are also at risk for worse outcomes from pregnancy associated bacterial and viral infections such as influenza, urinary tract infections, and now COVID-19.

Research Objectives and Scope

This initiative will support the establishment of a sustainable infrastructure and interdisciplinary research to generate innovative approaches to mitigate maternal morbidity and mortality (PRAMM) related to infections and sepsis, that could be leveraged to address other leading causes of PRAMM. The initiative requires an emphasis on disparities research inclusive of age, geographic, socioeconomic, and racial/ethnic disparities, including people with disabilities. Cooperative agreements are expected to promote interdisciplinary collaborations, synergistic research projects and sharing of knowledge and progress between funded projects(see descriptions of required components below for examples of synergy) that encompass significant community partnership to achieve goals and objectives in the following broad areas:

Scientific Research

  • Stimulate research that takes an integrated and systems approach to assessing and potentially mitigating infection related PRAMM and PRAMM disparities.
  • Establish and support interdisciplinary research in biomedical including basic science, behavioral, clinical, population, social sciences, and other relevant disciplines.
  • Develop tools and methodologies for cross-sectional as well as longitudinal data capture and/or use of existing data, measurement, analysis, and risk assessment that foster integration of the multiple factors that contribute to PRAMM and PRAMM disparities.
  • Test and evaluate interventions, technology developments, or biological hypotheses using randomized or quasi-experimental intervention designs as appropriate.
  • Link or establish the feasibility of linking existing MM/pregnancy-related and pregnancy-associated morbidity datasets, electronic health records, and clinical and biomarker data from existing national cohorts, biobank data, national surveys and registries for maternal morbidity risk prediction and monitoring of maternal infections and sepsis.

Community Research Partnership

  • Develop strategies for enhancing community stakeholders in research partnerships that engage women and their families, community healthcare providers and health systems to identify barriers to and community-specific opportunities for optimal maternal health equity.
  • Design and test strategies to improve interdisciplinary coordinated care, particularly during transition periods, from prenatal to one year postpartum to prevent adverse health outcomes and mortality.
  • Develop and/or promote strategies that utilize alternate models of care, such as telehealth, and assess their impact on PRAMM and PRAMM disparities.
  • Generate new knowledge that directly benefits impacted communities and population groups, leading to improved health care, intervention, and prevention strategies.
  • Develop innovative patient and provider education of PRAMM and PRAMM disparities.

Areas of research interests include but are not limited to the following:

  • Determine the contribution of immune system dysregulation and autoimmunity during pregnancy and the postpartum period leading to poor pregnancy and maternal health outcomes.
  • Identify determinants of risk or protection to detect the most vulnerable populations and provide points of intervention in infection and immunity.
  • Determine how factors related to race, ethnicity, geographic location, and age affect the underlying leading causes, contributors, and mechanisms of maternal infections such as endometritis, urinary tract infections, pneumonia and progression to sepsis as well as pregnancy related infections such as influenza and SARS-CoV-2.
  • Identify multi-level (individual, interpersonal, community, and sociocultural) determinants of maternal health disparities, as well as factors that contribute to optimal maternal outcomes in high risk communities.
  • Develop approaches or interventions that target pregnancy-related infections and/or underlying risk factors during the perinatal and postnatal periods and assess their impact on maternal health status.
  • Link or establish the feasibility of linking existing MM/pregnancy-related and pregnancy-associated morbidity datasets, electronic health records, and clinical and biomarker data from existing national cohorts, biobank data, national surveys and registries for maternal morbidity risk prediction and monitoring of maternal infections and sepsis.
  • Identification of behavioral factors that worsen or lessen the severity of various infections
  • Research on the social determinants of PRAMM infections in the context of maternal mortality more broadly
  • Research to identify the major social, behavioral, economic, and geographic factors that influence levels, trends, and disparities in PRAMM infections in the context of maternal mortality more broadly
  • Research to identify the pathways through which social determinants affect PRAMM infections or risk for PRAMM infections, such as interactions between social and environmental exposures and maternal genetic characteristics, and the mediating and moderating effects of family and community.
  • Research on how PRAMM infection is affected by family structure and resources, direct and indirect maternal exposure to violence, paternal characteristics and behavior, maternal characteristics and exposures prior to pregnancy, and access to and quality of medical care.

Non-Responsive Applications

The following types of applications will be considered non-responsive to the FOA: (1) Applications with a focus on addressing the opioid epidemic, (2) Applications without community partnerships, (3) Applications that do not address health disparities, (4) Applications that do not include severe maternal morbidity or mortality as an outcome, (5) Projects involving data collection on women outside of the United States, (6) Applications outside of the scope of NICHD priorities will be deemed non-responsive. See strategic plan: https://www.nichd.nih.gov/about/org/strategicplan.

Award Structure

This UG3/UH3 Phased Innovation Award has two phases: 1) One Year UG3 award for milestone-driven studies to demonstrate meaningful partnerships with community stakeholders that engage women and their families, community healthcare providers and health systems to identify barriers to and community-specific opportunities for optimal maternal health equity as well as the establishment of a sustainable infrastructure and interdisciplinary research to generate innovative approaches to mitigate maternal morbidity and mortality (PRAMM) related to infections and sepsis, that could be leveraged to address other leading causes of PRAMM, with a possible transition to 2) the UH3 award for interdisciplinary research using the established infrastructure and community partnerships. Applications must include a Go/No-Go Transition Milestone to be assessed at the end of the UG3. Funding of the UG3 (Phase 1) does not guarantee support of the UH3 (Phase 2) award for research implementation, and it is anticipated that not all funded UG3 projects will transition to the UH3 phase. Transition to the UH3 phase will be determined by a programmatic evaluation at NIH that is based on Go/No-Go Transition Milestone accomplishment. Continued programmatic priorities and availability of funds also impact the decision to transition to the UH3 award. Appeals of the transition decision will not be accepted.

 Required Capabilities of the UG3/UH3

Scientific Research —The UG3/UH3 will coordinate, harmonize, and provide technical assistance and training for the development and execution of assessment measures and scientific and clinical protocols; develop an overall research strategy that includes plans for oversight, methodology, evaluation and validation metrics, mitigation strategies, data management, dissemination and communication plans, and an implementation strategy; test and evaluate interventions, technology developments, or biological hypotheses using randomized or quasi-experimental intervention designs as appropriate.

Community Partnership and Dissemination— The UG3/UH3 will oversee and develop protocols and dissemination materials with investigators, including working to ensure cultural sensitivity in assessments, consenting process, and tool development; establish partnerships in a low-resource setting or catchment area (including towns, cities, or counties) experiencing high rates of PRAMM and conduct needs assessments.

Optional Data Capabilities

Data Research Coordination
Data Research Coordination is vital to the efficient and successful performance of the UG3/UH3 cooperative agreements; this coordination will involve sample tracking, laboratory data management, data storage, data analysis, and data sharing.

See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.

Section II. Award Information

Funding Instrument

Cooperative Agreement: A support mechanism used when there will be substantial Federal scientific or programmatic involvement. Substantial involvement means that, after award, NIH scientific or program staff will assist, guide, coordinate, or participate in project activities. See Section VI.2 for additional information about the substantial involvement for this FOA.

Application Types Allowed
New

The OER Glossary and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on these application types. Only those application types listed here are allowed for this FOA.

Clinical Trial?

Optional: Accepting applications that either propose or do not propose clinical trial(s).

Need help determining whether you are doing a clinical trial?

Funds Available and Anticipated Number of Awards

NICHD intends to commit $2 Million in FY 2022 to fund 2-4 awards.

Award Budget
Application budgets are not limited but need to reflect the actual needs of the proposed project.
Award Project Period

UG3/UH3 Phased Innovation AwardsThis UG3/UH3 Phased Innovation Award has two phases. The UG3 (Phase 1) will be a One-year award. The UH3 (Phase 2) will be a three-year award.

NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made from this FOA.

Section III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants

Eligible Organizations

Higher Education Institutions

  • Public/State Controlled Institutions of Higher Education
  • Private Institutions of Higher Education

The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:

  • Hispanic-serving Institutions
  • Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
  • Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs)
  • Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions
  • Asian American Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISIs)

Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education

  • Nonprofits with 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)
  • Nonprofits without 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)

For-Profit Organizations

  • Small Businesses
  • For-Profit Organizations (Other than Small Businesses)

Local Governments

  • State Governments
  • County Governments
  • City or Township Governments
  • Special District Governments
  • Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Federally Recognized)
  • Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Other than Federally Recognized)

Federal Government

  • Eligible Agencies of the Federal Government
  • U.S. Territory or Possession

Other

  • Independent School Districts
  • Public Housing Authorities/Indian Housing Authorities
  • Native American Tribal Organizations (other than Federally recognized tribal governments)
  • Faith-based or Community-based Organizations
  • Regional Organizations
Foreign Institutions

Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are not eligible to apply.

Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.

Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are not allowed. 

Required Registrations

Applicant organizations

Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as possible. The NIH Policy on Late Submission of Grant Applications states that failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission.

  • System for Award Management (SAM) – Applicants must complete and maintain an active registration, which requires renewal at least annually. The renewal process may require as much time as the initial registration. SAM registration includes the assignment of a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code for domestic organizations which have not already been assigned a CAGE Code.
    • NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code – Foreign organizations must obtain an NCAGE code (in lieu of a CAGE code) in order to register in SAM.
    • Unique Entity Identifier (UEI)- A UEI is issued as part of the SAM.gov registration process. SAM registrations prior to fall 2021 were updated to include a UEI. For applications due on or after January 25, 2022, the UEI must be provided on the application forms (e.g., FORMS-G); the same UEI must be used for all registrations, as well as on the grant application.
    • Dun and Bradstreet Universal Numbering System (DUNS) – Organization registrations prior to April 2022 require applicants to obtain a DUNS prior to registering in SAM. By April 2022, the federal government will stop using the DUNS number as an entity identifier and will transition to the Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) issued by SAM. Prior to April 2022, after obtaining a DUNS number, applicants can begin both SAM and eRA Commons registrations. The same DUNS number must be used for all registrations, as well as on the grant application.
  • eRA Commons - Once the unique organization identifier (DUNS prior to April 2022; UEI after April 2022) is established, organizations can register with eRA Commons in tandem with completing their full SAM and Grants.gov registrations; all registrations must be in place by time of submission. eRA Commons requires organizations to identify at least one Signing Official (SO) and at least one Program Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) account in order to submit an application.
  • Grants.gov – Applicants must have an active SAM registration in order to complete the Grants.gov registration.

Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))

All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account.  PD(s)/PI(s) should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate their existing account with the applicant organization in eRA Commons. If the PD/PI is also the organizational Signing Official, they must have two distinct eRA Commons accounts, one for each role. Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.

Eligible Individuals (Program Director/Principal Investigator)

Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with his/her organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for NIH support.

For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

2. Cost Sharing

This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

3. Additional Information on Eligibility

Number of Applications

Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct.

The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time, per 2.3.7.4 Submission of Resubmission Application. This means that the NIH will not accept:

  • A new (A0) application that is submitted before issuance of the summary statement from the review of an overlapping new (A0) or resubmission (A1) application.
  • A resubmission (A1) application that is submitted before issuance of the summary statement from the review of the previous new (A0) application.
  • An application that has substantial overlap with another application pending appeal of initial peer review (see 2.3.9.4 Similar, Essentially Identical, or Identical Applications)

Section IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Requesting an Application Package

The application forms package specific to this opportunity must be accessed through ASSIST, Grants.gov Workspace or an institutional system-to-system solution. Links to apply using ASSIST or Grants.gov Workspace are available in Part 1 of this FOA. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution.

2. Content and Form of Application Submission

It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide except where instructed in this funding opportunity announcement to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.

Letter of Intent

Although a letter of intent is required, it is not binding, and does not enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information that it contains allows IC staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review.

By the date listed in Part 1. Overview Information, prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:

  • Descriptive title of proposed activity
  • Name(s), address(es), and telephone number(s) of the PD(s)/PI(s)
  • Names of other key personnel
  • Participating institution(s)
  • Number and title of this funding opportunity

The letter of intent should be sent to:

Nahida Chakhtoura MD, MSGH
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
Telephone: 301-435-6872
Email: nahida.chakhtoura@nih.gov

Page Limitations

All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.

Instructions for Application Submission

The following section supplements the instructions found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this FOA.

SF424(R&R) Cover

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

SF424(R&R) Project/Performance Site Locations

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

SF424(R&R) Other Project Information

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

SF424(R&R) Senior/Key Person Profile

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

R&R Budget

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

R&R Subaward Budget

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

PHS 398 Research Plan

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:

Specific Aims: Provide the overall goals or hypotheses for the entire project and indicate separate Specific Aims to be accomplished in the UG3 phase and in the UH3 phase. Describe the specific aims for the project as a whole and how the proposed activities will have a measurable impact on understanding or reducing maternal infections, disparities in maternal infections, or mortality related to maternal infections.

Research Strategy: In preparing the application, investigators should consider that the application will be assigned a single overall impact score. Thus, clarity and completeness of the application with regard to specific goals and the feasibility of each phase and the Go/No-Go transition milestone are critical.

The Research Strategy should include the following:

  • An overview of the proposed research to address one of the leading causes of maternal morbidity and mortality, infection and sepsis, especially in communities most at risk of PRAMM, including major goals and objectives, the type of research to be conducted, disciplines involved, and risk factors or determinants under study.
  • Summarize the design, structure, and governance of the proposed research , the features and functions of the proposed work and how they interact and synergize with each other and with the proposed research projects, and plans and procedures to monitor and assess progress of the project.
  • Describe how the proposed research will advance the knowledge and science of maternal morbidity and mortality resulting from infections and facilitate equitable community stakeholder partnerships.
  • Summarize existing linkages with community stakeholders and the principles, policies, and practices that will guide when and how the project will engage with communities and for what purposes.
  • Describe the plans for oversight, methodology, evaluation and validation metrics, mitigation strategies, data management, dissemination and communication plans, and implementation strategies.
  • Describe plans for building a sustainable relationship between community partners and investigators in the development of protocols, revisions based on community partner input, and dissemination materials for the external community, including but not limited to working to ensure cultural sensitivity in assessments, consenting process, and tool development.
  • Describe plans for establishing an interdisciplinary infrastructure committed to PRAMM research.
  • Optional: Describe plans for carrying out the Data Research Coordination functions and how they will support sample tracking, laboratory data management, data storage, and provide data, and data analysis. 

Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

NICHD Plans for Sharing Human and Non-Human Data and/or Biospecimens

NICHD expects that data, biospecimens, and results of NICHD-funded research will be shared with the wider scientific community to the extent feasible and in a timely manner. NIH Data Sharing Policy expects the timely release and sharing of data to be no later than the acceptance for publication of the main findings from the final dataset. All NICHD applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, are expected to include a Sharing Plan that addresses sharing of data as well as biospecimens, if applicable. Ideally, this plan would include submitting data or biospecimens to an appropriate repository. These plans will also be considered by program staff as award decisions are being made as appropriate and consistent with achieving the goals of the program.

Specifically, for human data, the NICHD encourages the use of the Data and Specimen Hub (DASH), a centralized resource for researchers to store and access de-identified data from studies funded by NICHD. They can also submit information about the location and availability of biospecimens to DASH, if applicable. Submission of data to the NICHD DASH is one way that grantees may meet the requirements of the NIH Data Sharing Policy and make study data available for secondary analyses. Information about DASH may be obtained at https://dash.nichd.nih.gov/

If use of DASH is not feasible, NICHD expects awardees to share data and/or biospecimens through other equivalent broad-sharing data and/or biospecimen repositories. For projects generating large-scale human genetic data, applicants should provide a Provisional or Institutional Certification specifying whether the individual-level data can be shared through an NIH approved repository, such as dbGaP, in line with the NIH Genomic Data Sharing Policy (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-14-124.html).

Appendix:
Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information

When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials (and when applicable, clinical trials research experience) follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:

If you answered “Yes” to the question “Are Human Subjects Involved?” on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or Delayed Onset Study record.

Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

Delayed Onset Study

Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start).All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

PHS Assignment Request Form

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

3. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)

See Part 1. Section III.1 for information regarding the requirement for obtaining a unique entity identifier and for completing and maintaining active registrations in System for Award Management (SAM), NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code (if applicable), eRA Commons, and Grants.gov

4. Submission Dates and Times

Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission. When a submission date falls on a weekend or Federal holiday, the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day.

Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies). Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH’s electronic system for grants administration. NIH and Grants.gov systems check the application against many of the application instructions upon submission. Errors must be corrected and a changed/corrected application must be submitted to Grants.gov on or before the application due date and time.  If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late. Applications that miss the due date and time are subjected to the NIH Policy on Late Application Submission.

Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.

Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

5. Intergovernmental Review (E.O. 12372)

This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.

6. Funding Restrictions

All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

7. Other Submission Requirements and Information

Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.  Paper applications will not be accepted.

Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.

For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit How to Apply – Application Guide. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Dealing with System Issues guidance. For assistance with application submission, contact the Application Submission Contacts in Section VII.

Important reminders:

All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential fieldof the Senior/Key Person Profile form. Failure to register in the Commons and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the successful submission of an electronic application to NIH. See Section III of this FOA for information on registration requirements.

The applicant organization must ensure that the unique entity identifier (DUNS number or UEI as required) provided on the application is the same number used in the organization’s profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Management. Additional information may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

See more tips for avoiding common errors.

Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with application instructions by the Center for Scientific Review and responsiveness by components of participating organizations, NIH. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.

Post Submission Materials

Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy. Any instructions provided here are in addition to the instructions in the policy.

Section V. Application Review Information

1. Criteria

Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process.  Applications submitted to the NIH in support of the NIH mission are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.

A proposed Clinical Trial application may include study design, methods, and intervention that are not by themselves innovative but address important questions or unmet needs. Additionally, the results of the clinical trial may indicate that further clinical development of the intervention is unwarranted or lead to new avenues of scientific investigation.

Overall Impact

Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).

Scored Review Criteria

Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit, and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.

Significance

Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project rigorous? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials

Are the scientific rationale and need for a clinical trial to test the proposed hypothesis or intervention well supported by preliminary data, clinical and/or preclinical studies, or information in the literature or knowledge of biological mechanisms? For trials focusing on clinical or public health endpoints, is this clinical trial necessary for testing the safety, efficacy or effectiveness of an intervention that could lead to a change in clinical practice, community behaviors or health care policy? For trials focusing on mechanistic, behavioral, physiological, biochemical, or other biomedical endpoints, is this trial needed to advance scientific understanding?

Investigator(s)

Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or those in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials

With regard to the proposed leadership for the project, do the PD/PI(s) and key personnel have the expertise, experience, and ability to organize, manage and implement the proposed clinical trial and meet milestones and timelines? Do they have appropriate expertise in study coordination, data management and statistics? For a multicenter trial, is the organizational structure appropriate and does the application identify a core of potential center investigators and staffing for a coordinating center?

Innovation

Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials

Does the design/research plan include innovative elements, as appropriate, that enhance its sensitivity, potential for information or potential to advance scientific knowledge or clinical practice?

Approach

Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have the investigators included plans to address weaknesses in the rigor of prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?

If the project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, are the plans to address 1) the protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults), justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?

Are the plans for the community partnership and investigators effective throughout the entire process for the development of protocols and dissemination materials for the external community, including but not limited to working to ensure cultural sensitivity in assessments, consenting process, and tool development?  Are there effective plans for including community feedback in the modification of the research questions or implementation plans?

What is the likelihood that the proposed research infrastructure and community partnerships will bee sustained beyond the funded project?

Optional: Will the Data Research Coordination plans be effective in supporting sample tracking, laboratory data management, data acquisition, data storage, data analysis, and data sharing?

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials

Does the application adequately address the following, if applicable

Study Design

Is the study design justified and appropriate to address primary and secondary outcome variable(s)/endpoints that will be clear, informative and relevant to the hypothesis being tested? Is the scientific rationale/premise of the study based on previously well-designed preclinical and/or clinical research? Given the methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions, is the study design adequately powered to answer the research question(s), test the proposed hypothesis/hypotheses, and provide interpretable results? Is the trial appropriately designed to conduct the research efficiently? Are the study populations (size, gender, age, demographic group), proposed intervention arms/dose, and duration of the trial, appropriate and well justified?

Are potential ethical issues adequately addressed? Is the process for obtaining informed consent or assent appropriate? Is the eligible population available? Are the plans for recruitment outreach, enrollment, retention, handling dropouts, missed visits, and losses to follow-up appropriate to ensure robust data collection? Are the planned recruitment timelines feasible and is the plan to monitor accrual adequate? Has the need for randomization (or not), masking (if appropriate), controls, and inclusion/exclusion criteria been addressed? Are differences addressed, if applicable, in the intervention effect due to sex/gender and race/ethnicity?

Are the plans to standardize, assure quality of, and monitor adherence to, the trial protocol and data collection or distribution guidelines appropriate? Is there a plan to obtain required study agent(s)? Does the application propose to use existing available resources, as applicable?

Data Management and Statistical Analysis

Are planned analyses and statistical approach appropriate for the proposed study design and methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions? Are the procedures for data management and quality control of data adequate at clinical site(s) or at center laboratories, as applicable? Have the methods for standardization of procedures for data management to assess the effect of the intervention and quality control been addressed? Is there a plan to complete data analysis within the proposed period of the award?

Environment

Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?

In addition, for applications involving clinical trials

If proposed, are the administrative, data coordinating, enrollment and laboratory/testing centers, appropriate for the trial proposed?

Does the application adequately address the capability and ability to conduct the trial at the proposed site(s) or centers? Are the plans to add or drop enrollment centers, as needed, appropriate?

If international site(s) is/are proposed, does the application adequately address the complexity of executing the clinical trial?

If multi-sites/centers, is there evidence of the ability of the individual site or center to: (1) enroll the proposed numbers; (2) adhere to the protocol; (3) collect and transmit data in an accurate and timely fashion; and, (4) operate within the proposed organizational structure?

Additional Review Criteria

As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give separate scores for these items.

Study Timeline

Specific to applications involving clinical trials

Is the study timeline described in detail, taking into account start-up activities, the anticipated rate of enrollment, and planned follow-up assessment? Is the projected timeline feasible and well justified? Does the project incorporate efficiencies and utilize existing resources (e.g., CTSAs, practice-based research networks, electronic medical records, administrative database, or patient registries) to increase the efficiency of participant enrollment and data collection, as appropriate?

Are potential challenges and corresponding solutions discussed (e.g., strategies that can be implemented in the event of enrollment shortfalls)?

Protections for Human Subjects

For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.

For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.

Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Individuals Across the Lifespan

When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults) to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.

Vertebrate Animals

The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following criteria: (1) description of proposed procedures involving animals, including species, strains, ages, sex, and total number to be used; (2) justifications for the use of animals versus alternative models and for the appropriateness of the species proposed; (3) interventions to minimize discomfort, distress, pain and injury; and (4) justification for euthanasia method if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. Reviewers will assess the use of chimpanzees as they would any other application proposing the use of vertebrate animals. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section.

Biohazards

Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.

Resubmissions

Not applicable

Renewals

Not applicable

Revisions

Not applicable

Additional Review Considerations

As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items, and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.

Applications from Foreign Organizations

Not Applicable.

Select Agent Research

Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).

Resource Sharing Plans

Reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources, are reasonable: (1) Data Sharing Plan; (2) Sharing Model Organisms; and (3)  Genomic Data Sharing Plan (GDS).

Reviewers will also comment on the plans for sharing Human and Non-Human Data and/or Biospecimens as requested in Section IV.

Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources:

For projects involving key biological and/or chemical resources, reviewers will comment on the brief plans proposed for identifying and ensuring the validity of those resources.

Budget and Period of Support

Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.

2. Review and Selection Process

Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by NICHD, in accordance with NIH peer review policy and procedures, using the stated review criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA Commons.

As part of the scientific peer review, all applications will receive a written critique.

Applications may undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit (generally the top half of applications under review) will be discussed and assigned an overall impact score.

Appeals of initial peer review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this FOA.

Applications will be assigned to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this FOA. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the National Advisory Child Health and Human Development (NACHHD) Council. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:

  • Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as determined by scientific peer review.
  • Availability of funds.
  • Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.

3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates

After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) via the eRA Commons. Refer to Part 1 for dates for peer review, advisory council review, and earliest start date.

Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Section VI. Award Administration Information

1. Award Notices

If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via email to the recipient's business official.

Recipients must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.5. Funding Restrictions. Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs.

Any application awarded in response to this FOA will be subject to terms and conditions found on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website.  This includes any recent legislation and policy applicable to awards that is highlighted on this website.

Individual awards are based on the application submitted to, and as approved by, the NIH and are subject to the IC-specific terms and conditions identified in the NoA.

ClinicalTrials.gov: If an award provides for one or more clinical trials. By law (Title VIII, Section 801 of Public Law 110-85), the "responsible party" must register and submit results information for certain “applicable clinical trials” on the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System Information Website (https://register.clinicaltrials.gov). NIH expects registration and results reporting of all trials whether required under the law or not. For more information, see https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/reporting/index.htm

Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee Approval: Recipient institutions must ensure that all protocols are reviewed by their IRB or IEC. To help ensure the safety of participants enrolled in NIH-funded studies, the recipient must provide NIH copies of documents related to all major changes in the status of ongoing protocols.

Data and Safety Monitoring Requirements: The NIH policy for data and safety monitoring requires oversight and monitoring of all NIH-conducted or -supported human biomedical and behavioral intervention studies (clinical trials) to ensure the safety of participants and the validity and integrity of the data. Further information concerning these requirements is found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/hs/data_safety.htm and in the application instructions (SF424 (R&R) and PHS 398).

Investigational New Drug or Investigational Device Exemption Requirements: Consistent with federal regulations, clinical research projects involving the use of investigational therapeutics, vaccines, or other medical interventions (including licensed products and devices for a purpose other than that for which they were licensed) in humans under a research protocol must be performed under a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigational new drug (IND) or investigational device exemption (IDE).

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Recipients, and Activities, including of note, but not limited to:

If a recipient is successful and receives a Notice of Award, in accepting the award, the recipient agrees that any activities under the award are subject to all provisions currently in effect or implemented during the period of the award, other Department regulations and policies in effect at the time of the award, and applicable statutory provisions.

Should the applicant organization successfully compete for an award, recipients of federal financial assistance (FFA) from HHS must administer their programs in compliance with federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, age and, in some circumstances, religion, conscience, and sex (including gender identify, sexual orientation, and pregnancy). This includes ensuring programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency and persons with disabilities. The HHS Office for Civil Rights provides guidance on complying with civil rights laws enforced by HHS. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-providers/provider-obligations/index.html and https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/nondiscrimination/index.html

HHS recognizes that research projects are often limited in scope for many reasons that are nondiscriminatory, such as the principal investigator’s scientific interest, funding limitations, recruitment requirements, and other considerations. Thus, criteria in research protocols that target or exclude certain populations are warranted where nondiscriminatory justifications establish that such criteria are appropriate with respect to the health or safety of the subjects, the scientific study design, or the purpose of the research. For additional guidance regarding how the provisions apply to NIH grant programs, please contact the Scientific/Research Contact that is identified in Section VII under Agency Contacts of this FOA.

Please contact the HHS Office for Civil Rights for more information about obligations and prohibitions under federal civil rights laws at https://www.hhs.gov/ocr/about-us/contact-us/index.html or call 1-800-368-1019 or TDD 1-800-537-7697.

In accordance with the statutory provisions contained in Section 872 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), NIH awards will be subject to the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) requirements. FAPIIS requires Federal award making officials to review and consider information about an applicant in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS) prior to making an award. An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through FAPIIS and comment on any information about itself that a Federal agency previously entered and is currently in FAPIIS. The Federal awarding agency will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to other information in FAPIIS, in making a judgement about the applicant’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 45 CFR Part 75.205 and 2 CFR Part 200.206 “Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants.” This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.

Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award

Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award

The following special terms of the award are in addition to, and not in lieu of, otherwise applicable U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) administrative guidelines, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) grant administration regulations at 45 CFR Part 75, 2 CFR Part 200, and other HHS, PHS, and NIH grant administration policies.

The administrative and funding instrument used for this program will be the cooperative agreement, an "assistance" mechanism (rather than an "acquisition" mechanism), in which substantial NIH programmatic involvement with the recipients is anticipated during the performance of the activities. Under the cooperative agreement, the NIH's purpose is to support and stimulate the recipients' activities by involvement in and otherwise working jointly with the award recipients in a partnership role; it is not to assume direction, prime responsibility, or a dominant role in the activities. Consistent with this concept, the dominant role and prime responsibility reside with the recipient for the project as a whole, although specific tasks and activities may be shared among the recipients and the NIH as defined below.

The PD(s)/PI(s) will have the primary responsibility for:

  • The planning, direction, and execution of the proposed research, including definition of objectives and approaches; implementation; data management and analysis, interpretations and publication of results;
  • Participating in the planning for meetings of the UG3/UH3 award recipients, to focus on infrastructure building, community participation, study initiation, and study results;
  • Making drafts of manuscripts available for review (electronically) to the NIH Project Scientists and other NIH staff at the time they are circulated to coauthors and when the final manuscripts are submitted for publication. This ensures the program can maintain an up-to-date summary of program accomplishments and can prepare for press releases of findings if warranted;
  • Prior to the end of the UG3, recipients will submit the transition package, which includes the UG3 progress report, progress toward agreed-upon UG3 milestones, including health outcome of primary interest, and a description of readiness to implement the UH3 research;
  • Recipients will retain custody of and have primary rights to the data and software developed under these awards, subject to Government rights of access consistent with current DHHS, PHS, and NIH policies.

NIH staff have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below:

During the performance of the award, the NIH Project Scientists, with assistance from other NIH scientific staff will provide appropriate assistance, advice and guidance in the design of the activities; the analysis of data; management and technical performance, and the preparation of publications. The Project Scientists will serve as liaison/facilitators between the recipient, the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, and other government agencies (e.g., FDA, USDA, and CDC) and will serve as a resource for scientific and policy information related to the goals of the awardee's research.

The NIH Project Scientist will additionally:

  • Monitor study results and quality assurance across all research sites to ensure the production of high-quality, unbiased results;
  • Monitor progress towards study goals and achievement of study timelines and Go/No-Go Transition Milestone;
  • Facilitate access to technical resources to increase harmonization and interoperability of study datasets;
  • Periodically request research data for use in preparing internal reports on UG3/UH3 activities.

The NIH Program Official will additionally:

  • Take responsibility for the normal scientific and programmatic stewardship of the award and will be named in the award notice; these responsibilities include:
  • Enforcement of general statutory, regulatory, or policy requirements;
  • Approval of recipient plans prior to award and review of performance after completion;
  • Evaluation of progress by reviews of technical or fiscal reports, site visits, or external consultants, to determine that performance is consistent with the terms and conditions of the award;
  • Technical assistance requested by recipients or unanticipated procedures to correct programmatic or financial deficiencies in recipients' performance;
  • Scientific/technical discussions with recipients, or actions to facilitate or expedite interactions between recipients, e.g., organizing and holding meetings of investigators;
  • The option to halt a project if technical performance and/or objectives are not met;
  • Transition to the UH3 phase will be determined by a programmatic evaluation at NIH that will include the IC program official or program director.

Areas of Joint PD/PI and NIH staff Responsibility include:

  • Participate in a committee of NICHD program staff and UG3/UH3 award recipients to facilitate shared goals, enhance resource sharing and foster collaborations;
  • Develop a data structure that results in a findable, accessible, interoperable, and reliable dataset to be made available for controlled access public use at the end of the program;
  • Coordinate and facilitate access to datasets for all approved internal and external research collaborators;
  • Provide input and generate research presentations and publications of data (PD/PI and NIH Project Scientist).

Dispute Resolution:

Any disagreements that may arise in scientific or programmatic matters (within the scope of the award) between award recipients and the NIH may be brought to Dispute Resolution. A Dispute Resolution Panel composed of three members will be convened. It will have three members: a designee of the Steering Committee chosen without NIH staff voting, one NIH designee, and a third designee with expertise in the relevant area who is chosen by the other two; in the case of individual disagreement, the first member may be chosen by the individual recipient. This special dispute resolution procedure does not alter the recipient's right to appeal an adverse action that is otherwise appealable in accordance with PHS regulation 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D, and DHHS regulation 45 CFR Part 16.

3. Reporting

When multiple years are involved, recipients will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

A final RPPR, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. NIH FOAs outline intended research goals and objectives. Post award, NIH will review and measure performance based on the details and outcomes that are shared within the RPPR, as described at 45 CFR Part 75.301 and 2 CFR Part 200.301.

The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Transparency Act), includes a requirement for recipients of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later.  All recipients of applicable NIH grants and cooperative agreements are required to report to the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at www.fsrs.gov on all subawards over $25,000.  See the NIH Grants Policy Statement for additional information on this reporting requirement.

In accordance with the regulatory requirements provided at 45 CFR 75.113 and Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75, recipients that have currently active Federal grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from all Federal awarding agencies with a cumulative total value greater than $10,000,000 for any period of time during the period of performance of a Federal award, must report and maintain the currency of information reported in the System for Award Management (SAM) about civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings in connection with the award or performance of a Federal award that reached final disposition within the most recent five-year period.  The recipient must also make semiannual disclosures regarding such proceedings. Proceedings information will be made publicly available in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS).  This is a statutory requirement under section 872 of Public Law 110-417, as amended (41 U.S.C. 2313).  As required by section 3010 of Public Law 111-212, all information posted in the designated integrity and performance system on or after April 15, 2011, except past performance reviews required for Federal procurement contracts, will be publicly available.  Full reporting requirements and procedures are found in Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75 – Award Term and Conditions for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.

Section VII. Agency Contacts

We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.

Application Submission Contacts

eRA Service Desk (Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, and post-submission issues)

Finding Help Online: http://grants.nih.gov/support/ (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)

General Grants Information (Questions regarding application instructions, application processes, and NIH grant resources)
Email: GrantsInfo@nih.gov (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-637-3015

Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: support@grants.gov

Scientific/Research Contact(s)

Nahida Chakhtoura MD, MSGH
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
Telephone: 301-435-6872
Email: nahida.chakhtoura@mail.nih.gov

Juanita Chinn, PhD
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
Telephone: 301-827-4901
Email: juanita.chinn@nih.gov

Elena K Gorodetsky
Office Of Research On Women's Health (ORWH)
Phone: (301) 594-9004
E-mail: egorod@mail.nih.gov

Peer Review Contact(s)

Sherry Dupere, PhD
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
Telephone: 301-451-3415
Email: duperes@mail.nih.gov

Financial/Grants Management Contact(s)

Hazel Alsol
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
Telephone: 301-827-5437
Email: hazel.alsol@nih.gov

Section VIII. Other Information

Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Authority and Regulations

Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 2 CFR Part 200, 42 CFR Part 52, and 45 CFR Part 75.

NIH Office of Extramural Research Logo
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) - Home Page
Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
USA.gov - Government Made Easy
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health®


Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.