Participating Organization(s)	Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) NOTE: The policies, guidelines, terms, and conditions stated in this announcement may differ from those used by the NIH. Where this Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) provides specific written guidance that may differ from the general guidance provided in the grant application form, please follow the instructions given in this NOFO. Also note that AHRQ may have different page limits than NIH for the application Research Strategy, which can be found within each individual NOFO.
Components of Participating Organizations	Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Office of Extramural Research, Education and Priority Populations (OEREP)
Funding Opportunity Title	Dissemination and Implementation of Equity-Focused Evidence-Based Interventions in Healthcare Delivery Systems (R18)
Activity Code	R18 Research Demonstration and Dissemination Projects
Announcement Type	New
Related Notices	NOT-HS-23-005- Salary Limitation on AHRQ FY2023 Grants, Cooperative Agreements, and Contracts NOT-HS-17-001 - AHRQ Policy Guidance Regarding Inflationary Increases (aka, cost-of-living adjustments, or COLAs) beginning in Fiscal Year 2017 NOT-OD-22-195 New NIH "FORMS-H" Grant Application Forms and Instructions Coming for Due Dates on or after January 25, 2023 NOT-OD-21-170 Update: Notification of Upcoming Change in Federal-wide Unique Entity Identifier Requirements. NOT-OD-21-109 Expanding Requirement for eRA Commons IDs to All Senior/Key Personnel NOT-HS-21-015 AHRQ Policy on the Inclusion of Priority Populations in Research NOT-HS-22-012 Salary Limitation on AHRQ FY2022 Grants, Cooperative Agreements, and ContractsNOT-HS-21-002 - AHRQ Guide Notice on Exception to the Use of the Single IRB Review Requirements During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Public Health Emergency NOT-OD-21-073 Upcoming Changes to the Biographical Sketch and Other Support Format Page for Due Dates on or after May 25, 2021 NOT-OD-22-047 Extending the Special Exception to the NIH/AHRQ/NIOSH Post-Submission Material Policy During the COVID-19 Pandemic: August/October 2022 Councils NOT-HS-20-11 The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Data Management Plan Policy NOT-HS-20-005 AHRQ Guide Notice on Implementation of the Use of a Single Institutional Review Board (IRB) for Cooperative Research at 45 CFR 46.114 (b) NOT-HS-19-007 AHRQ Announces Change in Grant Recipient Purchasing of Identifiable CMS Data, effective FY2019 NOT-HS-16-018 AHRQ Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy NOT-HS-21-014 Special Emphasis Notice (SEN): AHRQ Announces Interest in Health Services Research to Advance Health Equity RFA-HS-22-001- Reducing Racial and Ethnic Healthcare Disparities in Chronic Conditions by Dissemination and Implementation of Patient Centered Outcomes Research (PCOR) Evidence
Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Number	RFA-HS-23-002
Companion Funding Opportunity	None
Number of Applications	See Section III. 3. Additional Information on Eligibility.
Assistance Listing Number(s)	93.226 These projects are being funded pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 299a
Funding Opportunity Purpose	This Notice of Funding Opportunity Announcement (NOFO) seeks applications for innovative research studies to test, refine, and implement equity-focused evidence-based interventions within healthcare delivery systems including the integration of implementation and outcome/impact evaluations.

It is critical that applicants follow the Research (R) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this NOFO or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts). Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the NOFO) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV and follow the AHRQ Grants Policy and Guidance found on the AHRQ website at http://www.ahrq.gov/funding/policies/nofoguidance/index.html.  

When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions.

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

Part 1. Overview Information
Part 2. Full Text of the Announcement

Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
Section II. Award Information
Section III. Eligibility Information
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
Section V. Application Review Information
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Section VII. Agency Contacts
Section VIII. Other Information

Background

The purpose of this funding opportunity announcement is to seek applications using dissemination and implementation (D&I) science to fill evidence gaps critical to the development, adaption, implementation, and evaluation of equity-focused evidence-based interventions (EFEBIs) to accelerate health equity within healthcare delivery systems.

Evidence-based interventions (EBIs) include but are not limited to care practices, processes, guidelines, programs, and policies shown to have effectiveness across multiple ecological levels (individual, interpersonal, health system, community, and societal/policy).

Addressing healthcare inequities in historically underserved populations continues to be a critical national priority. Healthcare systems have a vital role in transforming care to be more equitable and will require tools and intervention strategies to support action and sustainable progress. Yet historically, equity has not been an explicit focus of many EBIs. As a result, evidence regarding the generalizability and effectiveness of EBIs across diverse contexts, populations, and settings has been limited, thereby having the potential to exacerbate health inequities and even cause harm. Building this evidence-base requires explicit attention on equity-focused EBIs that can fill an important void and advance the goal of eliminating disparities in care delivery by supporting the widespread and accelerated use of effective interventions focused on equity.

D&I science offers tools (i.e., methods and frameworks) to support the scientific design, implementation, and evaluation of EBIs that answer important questions about how and why EBIs work or don't work and for whom they result in improvements in care delivery. Additionally, the science of de-implementation and adaptation, a growing focus within D&I science, can also have important implications for equity-focused EBIs as they involve examining the current implementation efforts to remove/replace inappropriate interventions that have the potential to exacerbate inequities or even cause harm.

While leveraging existing D&I methods and tools in building a new equity-focused evidence base for EBIs will be essential, this does not replace the requirement to explicitly focus on ensuring equity is fully centered at every aspect of the research process. Without the use of an explicit approach that is centering equity within D&I, it will not be possible to meet the goal of improving opportunities for interventions aimed at improvements in care delivery for all populations and address persistent disparities among historically underserved communities.

D&I equity-focused frameworks are emerging and can be leveraged. However, the integration of equity focused methods that foster participatory and bidirectional learning with D&I approaches can serve as an important step in accelerating more equitable care in healthcare delivery systems. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) offers one well-established approach that emphasizes and centers equity by using community organizing principles balanced with key attributes of cultural humility to holistically integrate stakeholders and community within the research process. Notably, CBPR and approaches fostering equity go beyond prioritizing partnerships between academic centers or health systems and stakeholders and community. Rather, CPBR approaches center equity by recognizing, unpacking, and addressing issues of status, trust, power, and privilege that have historically served as barriers to working with (rather than "in") a community. An approach to explicitly center equity in conjunction with established D&I science tools has the potential to fill important gaps in the evidence base for EBIs. This approach relies on commitment to a set of shared values, prioritizes co-creation and co-learning, and increases the likelihood of scaling, sustainability, and dissemination of EBIs that can meaningfully and effectively advance equity in healthcare delivery systems.

Objectives:

The objective of this NOFO is to build new evidence regarding the implementation and effectiveness of EFEBIs to address disparities and advance equitable care in healthcare delivery systems. Applications submitted in response to this NOFO must include a detailed description of the development, implementation, and evaluation of the EFEBI and include the following:

(1) description of how the holistic/participatory approach selected will be used to center equity and ensure the voices of stakeholder and community members from underserved and priority populations are reflected in all stages of the research process; description should detail methods and role of partners, stakeholders, and community, and discuss any potential limitations to the approach;

(2) description of how the project will address priorities of underserved population(s), including those who experience persistent poverty and other socioeconomic inequalities and achieve overall research and health equity goals;

(3) description of EBI(s) selection (why and how) to ensure advances in equitable care delivery (including considerations of de-implementation and adaptations), and clear description of the primary outcome measure(s);

(4) discussion of how study designs and methodologies (i.e., alternative or pragmatic) will maximize equity and inclusion of diverse contexts, populations, and settings, while also balancing aspects of scientific rigor such as reliability, internal and external validity;

(5) inclusion of a graphic framework/model and corresponding description to illustrate how the EBI(s) and research approach addresses evidence gaps (transparency of logic and assumptions); show hypothesized relationships between various elements to reach the desired outcome (advancing equity). This framework/model should also delineate/or align with elements/metrics for the implementation and impact evaluation including but not limited to: contextual factors ranging from the populations characteristics, features of setting in which the EBI(s) is being delivered, connections to systems and sectors outside of healthcare setting, role of social determinates of health, cultural, organizational, and structural factors including specifically addressing the role of discrimination and racism at multiple levels (structural, institutional, and personally mediated) in the healthcare system;

(5) description of equity-relevant metrics included in implementation and outcome evaluation, including measures of health equity and measures of both direct and indirect effects of contextual factors impacting health equity and consideration of potential limitations of current measures;

(6) address elements of scalability, sustainability, and dissemination including the role of participatory methods that foster inclusion of partner, stakeholder, community (end-users) voice.

 

References:

Brownson RC, Kumanyika SK, Kreuter MW, Haire-Joshu D. Implementation science should give higher priority to health equity. Implement Sci. 2021 Mar 19;16(1):28. doi: 10.1186/s13012-021-01097-0. PMID: 33740999; PMCID: PMC7977499.

Walsh-Bailey C, Tsai E, Tabak RG, Morshed AB, Norton WE, McKay VR, Brownson RC, Gifford S. A scoping review of de-implementation frameworks and models. Implement Sci. 2021 Nov 24;16(1):100. doi: 10.1186/s13012-021-01173-5. PMID: 34819122; PMCID: PMC8611904.

Brownson RC, Shelton RC, Geng EH, Glasgow RE. Revisiting concepts of evidence in implementation science. Implement Sci. 2022 Apr 12;17(1):26. doi: 10.1186/s13012-022-01201-y. PMID: 35413917; PMCID: PMC9004065.

Baumann AA, Cabassa LJ. Reframing implementation science to address inequities in healthcare delivery. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Mar 12;20(1):190. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-4975-3. PMID: 32164706; PMCID: PMC7069050.

Wallerstein N, Duran B. Theoretical, Historical, and Practice Roots of Community Based Participatory Research. In: Wallerstein N, Duran B, Oetzel JG, Minkler M, eds. Community-Based Participatory Research for Health: Advancing Social and Health Equity. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2018:17-29.

Jones M, Hoague D, Spriggs R, Catalan E, Adams N, Watkins T, Tripati A, Norris KC. Establishing a Framework for Sustainable Community Action Research. Ethn Dis. 2022 Oct 20;32(4):333-340. doi: 10.18865/ed.32.4.333. PMID: 36388858; PMCID: PMC9590601.

Definitions:

The following definitions can be used for the purpose of this notice of funding opportunity:

• Community-based Participatory Research is defined as "a collaborative approach to research that equitably involves all partners in the research process and recognizes the unique strengths that each brings. It begins with a research topic that is important to the community, has the aim of combining knowledge with action, and achieving social change to improve health outcomes and eliminate health disparities."(W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 2014)
• Equity is defined as the consistent and systematic, fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals, including individuals who belong to underserved communities that have been denied such treatment, such as Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American persons, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and other persons of color; members of religious minorities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with disabilities; persons who live in rural areas; and persons otherwise adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality. (Biden, 2021)
• Health equity is defined as "the principle underlying a commitment to reduce and, ultimately, eliminate disparities in health and in its determinants, including social determinants. Pursuing health equity means striving for the highest possible standard of health for all people and giving special attention to the needs of those at greatest risk of poor health, based on social conditions. Health equity means social justice in health (i.e., no one is denied the possibility to be healthy for belonging to a group that has historically been economically/socially disadvantaged)." (Braveman, 2014)
• Health disparities are defined as a particular type of health difference that is closely linked with social, economic, and/or environmental disadvantage. Health disparities adversely affect groups of people who have systematically experienced greater obstacles to health based on their racial or ethnic group; religion; socioeconomic status; gender; age; mental health; cognitive, sensory, or physical disability; sexual orientation or gender identity; geographic location; or other characteristics historically linked to discrimination or exclusion. (Healthy People 2030, 2021)
• Health system is defined as a healthcare organization that includes at least one hospital and at least one group of physicians providing comprehensive care, and who are connected with each other and with the hospital through common ownership or joint management. (AHRQ, 2021: https://www.ahrq.gov/chsp/data-resources/compendium.html)
• Healthcare disparities are differences in access to, quality of, safety of, or availability of medical facilities and services leading to variation in rates of disease occurrence and disabilities between population groups defined by socioeconomic characteristics such as age, ethnicity, economic resources, or gender and populations identified geographically. (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, n.d.)
• An implementation evaluation "stretches from initial needs assessment to formative evaluation, ongoing process evaluation, and finally summative evaluation to provide feedback to key stakeholders and decision makers," including assessment of the intervention's uptake, fidelity and adaptation during implementation, and the contextual conditions that may influence implementation and outcomes." (Gaglio & Glasgow, 2012)
• An outcome/impact evaluation "measures program effects in the target population by assessing the progress in the outcome objectives that the program is to achieve" or "assesses program effectiveness in achieving its ultimate goals [impact]." (The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)
• Social determinants of health (SDOH) "...are the non-medical factors that influence health outcomes. They are the conditions in which people are born, grow, work, live, and age, and the wider set of forces and systems shaping the conditions of daily life. These forces and systems include economic policies and systems, development agendas, social norms, social policies and political systems." (World Health Organization, 2022)
• Underserved community refers to populations sharing a particular characteristic, as well as geographic communities, that have been systematically denied a full opportunity to participate in aspects of economic, social, and civic life, as exemplified by the list in the preceding definition of equity. (White House Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government, # 13985, January 20, 2021)

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

These projects are being funded pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 299a, which provides that AHRQ shall conduct and support research, support demonstration projects, and disseminate information on healthcare and on systems for the delivery of such care, including activities with respect to the quality, effectiveness, efficiency, appropriateness, and value of healthcare services.

All applications submitted and AHRQ grants made in response to this NOFO are subject to 45 CFR Part 75 (Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for HHS Awards; https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt45.1.75), the HHS Grants Policy Statement (see https://www.ahrq.gov/funding/policies/hhspolicy/index.html), and the terms and conditions set forth in the Notice of Award

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 AHRQ support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:

• o Hispanic-serving Institutions
• o Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
• o Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs)
• o Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions
• o 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)

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 Governments

• 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

AHRQ's authorizing legislation does not allow for-profit organizations to be eligible to lead applications under this research mechanism. For-profit organizations may participate in projects as members of consortia or as subcontractors only. Because the purpose of this program is to improve healthcare in the United States, foreign institutions may participate in projects as members of consortia or as subcontractors only.  Applications submitted by for-profit organizations or foreign institutions will not be reviewed.  Organizations described in section 501(c) 4 of the Internal Revenue Code that engage in lobbying are not eligible.

HHS grants policy requires that the grant recipient perform a substantive role in the conduct of the planned project or program activity and not merely serve as a conduit of funds to another party or parties. If consortium/contractual activities represent a significant portion of the overall project, the applicant must justify why the applicant organization, rather than the party(s) performing this portion of the overall project, should be the recipient and what substantive role the applicant organization will play. Justification can be provided in the Specific Aims or Research Strategy section of the PHS398 Research Plan Component sections of the SF424 (R&R) application.  There is no budget allocation guideline for determining substantial involvement; determination of substantial involvement is based on a review of the primary project activities for which grant support is provided and the organization(s) that will be performing those activities.

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.

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.

• 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.
  • o 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.
  • o Unique Entity Identifier (UEI)- A UEI is issued as part of the SAM.gov registration process. The same UEI must be used for all registrations, as well as on the grant application.
• eRA Commons - Once the unique organization identifier is established, organizations can register with eRA Commons in tandem with completing their Grants.gov registration; 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.

Note: After January 25, 2022, all individuals listed on the R&R Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Form are required to have an eRA Commons username (Commons ID). See https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-21-109.html.

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 diverse backgrounds, including underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, individuals with disabilities, and women are always encouraged to apply for AHRQ 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. The AHRQ multiple PDs/PIs policy can be found at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-HS-16-018.html.

A single PD/PI, or the multiple PD(s)/PI(s) combined, must devote at least 20% minimum full-time effort (i.e., at least 8 hours per week) in each given year of the project.

This NOFO does not require cost sharing.

While there is no cost sharing requirement included in this NOFO, AHRQ welcomes applicant institutions, including any collaborating institutions, to devote resources to this effort. An indication of institutional support from the applicant and its collaborators indicates a greater potential of success and sustainability of the project. Examples of institutional support would include: donated equipment and space, institutional funded staff time and effort, or other resource investments. Applicant institutions should indicate institutional support by outlining the specific contributions to the project and providing assurances that their organization and any collaborators are committed to providing these funds and resources to the project. This information can be included at the end of the budget justification section of the application, but institutional support dollars are not to be shown/included in the detailed budget request.

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

The AHRQ will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time This means that the AHRQ 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.

 

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

It is critical that applicants follow the Research (R) Instructions in the 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.

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 AHRQ 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 emailed to:

Chivonne Walker

[email protected]

AHRQ will convene a technical assistance webinar to provide potential applicants with background information and respond to questions about the preparation of an application in response to this funding opportunity.

The technical assistance webinar will take place on Thursday, March 9, 2023 from 2:00PM to 3:00PM Eastern time. Attendees must register for this webinar by completing the registration form at https://cma.ahrq.gov/tawebinar. Registrants will receive log in information approximately 3 days before the webinar. The technical assistance webinar is open to any individual or organization. AHRQ encourages representatives from minority-serving institutions to participate in this webinar. Participation is not a prerequisite to submit an application.

Participants are encouraged to submit questions via email prior to the technical assistance webinar. Please submit questions to [email protected] by March 1, 2023 5:00PM Eastern time. Questions of a similar topic and nature may be grouped at the sole discretion of AHRQ staff. Notes from the technical assistance webinar will be posted on the AHRQ web site.

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

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

Note: Effective for due dates on or after January 25, 2023, the Data Management and Sharing Plan will be attached in the Other Plan(s) attachment in FORMS-H application forms packages.

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

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

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

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

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

Budget Component: Special Instructions for AHRQ applications

AHRQ is not using the Modular Grant Application and Award Process. Applicants applying for funding from AHRQ are to ignore application instructions concerning the Modular Grant Application and Award Process, and prepare applications using instructions for the Research and Related Budget Components of the SF 424 (R&R). Applications submitted in the Modular format will not be reviewed.

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

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

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

 

Letters of Support: Place institutional letters of support for the Advancing Equity in Healthcare Delivery Systems as a whole in this section. NOTE: Letters of support, recommendation, or affirmation from any entity or individual not directly participating in the project should not be included.

 

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, with the following modification:

Submission of a data management plan is required. AHRQ applicants are reminded to refer to NOT-HS-20-011: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Data Management Plan Policy for additional information on how to incorporate their data management plan into the resource sharing plan.

 

Appendix:

Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

Any instructions provided here are in addition to the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide instructions Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits.

When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or 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. For details regarding IRB approval, applicants may refer to the "AHRQ Revised Policy for Institutional Review Board (IRB) Review of Human Subjects Protocols in Grant Applications" (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not-hs-00-003.html). Applicant should also be aware of the AHRQ policy for use of single IRB for cooperative research, 45 CFR 46.114 (b)  https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-HS-20-005.html.

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

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

The Federal awarding agency may not make a Federal award to an applicant until the applicant has complied with all applicable unique entity identifier and SAM requirements and, if an applicant has not fully complied with the requirements by the time the Federal awarding agency is ready to make a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency may determine that the applicant is not qualified to receive a Federal award and use that determination as a basis for making a Federal award to another applicant

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.

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.

This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.

For efficient grant administration, AHRQ grant administration procedures will be used and conducted in accordance with the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement. The HHS Grants Policy Statement can be found at http://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/grants/grants/policies-regulations/hhsgps107.pdf.

Pre-award costs are allowable. A recipient may, at its own risk and without AHRQ prior approval, incur obligations and expenditures to cover costs up to 90 days before the beginning date of the initial budget period of a new award if such costs are necessary to conduct the project and would be allowable under the grant, if awarded, without AHRQ prior approval. If specific expenditures would otherwise require prior approval, the recipient must obtain AHRQ approval before incurring the cost. AHRQ prior approval is required for any costs to be incurred more than 90 days before the beginning date of the initial budget period of a new award.

The incurrence of pre-award costs in anticipation of a competing or non-competing award imposes no obligation on AHRQ either to make the award or to increase the amount of the approved budget if an award is made for less than the amount anticipated and is inadequate to cover the pre-award costs incurred. AHRQ expects the recipient to be fully aware that pre-award costs result in borrowing against future support and that such borrowing must not impair the recipient's ability to accomplish the project objectives in the approved time frame or in any way adversely affect the conduct of the project.

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

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

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

Important reminders:

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

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

See more tips for avoiding common errors.

Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness by the Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, and for responsiveness by AHRQ.

Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval of human subjects is not required prior to peer review of an application (see https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-HS-00-003.html). However, initiation of IRB review, if necessary or applicable, is strongly encouraged to assure timely commencement of research.

Although there is no immediate acknowledgement of the receipt of an application, applicants are generally notified of the review and funding assignment within eight (8) weeks.

Please be sure that you observe the total cost, project period, and page number limitations specified above for this NOFO. Application processing may be delayed or the application may be rejected if it does not comply with these requirements.

 

Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-19-083.html.Any instructions provided here are in addition to the instructions in the policy.

Priority Populations

AHRQ is committed to the inclusion of priority populations in health services research. The overall portfolio of health services research that AHRQ conducts and supports shall include the populations specifically named in AHRQ’s authorizing legislation: inner city; rural; low income; minority; women; children; elderly; and those with special healthcare needs, including those who have disabilities, need chronic care, or need end-of-life healthcare. 42 U.S.C. 299(c)(1). AHRQ also includes in its definition of priority populations those groups identified in Section 2(a) of Executive Order 13985 as members of underserved communities: Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American persons, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and other persons of color; members of religious minorities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with disabilities; persons who live in rural areas; and persons otherwise adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality.

AHRQ will broadly implement this inclusion policy across the research that AHRQ supports and conducts so that the portfolio of research is inclusive of all populations. AHRQ intends that these populations be included in studies such that the research design explicitly allows conduct of valid analyses. The policy applies to all grant applications. Investigators should review the document entitled, AHRQ Policy on the Inclusion of Priority Populations, which is available at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-HS-21-015.html. Applicants under this NOFO must consider and discuss including priority populations in research design as specified in this Notice.

Public Access to AHRQ-Funded Scientific Publications

Investigators should review the document titled AHRQ Announces new Policy for Public Access to AHRQ-Funded Scientific Publications , which is available at (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-HS-16-008.html). For all research arising from AHRQ support, this policy requires that AHRQ-funded authors submit an electronic version of the author’s final peer-reviewed accepted manuscript to the National Library of Medicine's PubMed Central (PMC) to be made publicly available within 12 months of the publisher’s date of publication.

AHRQ Data Management Plan Policy

Investigators should review the document titled AHRQ Data Management Plan (DMP) Policy, which is available at (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-HS-20-011.html). This policy requires applicants for AHRQ new/competing grants and research contracts to include a DMP for managing, storing and disseminating the primary data, samples, physical collections, and other supporting materials created or gathered in the course of research funded by AHRQ, or state why data management is not possible, as a component of their grant application or research contract proposal. 

Plan for Sharing Research Data

The precise content of the data-sharing plan will vary, depending on the data being collected and how the investigator is planning to share the data. Applicants who are planning to share data should describe briefly the expected schedule for data sharing; the format of the final dataset; the documentation to be provided; whether or not any analytic tools also will be provided; whether or not a data-sharing agreement will be required and, if so, a brief description of such an agreement (including the criteria for deciding who can receive the data and whether or not any conditions will be placed on their use); and the mode of data sharing (e.g., under its own auspices by mailing a disk or posting data on its institutional or personal website or through a data archive or enclave). Investigators choosing to share under their own auspices may wish to enter into a data-sharing agreement. References to data sharing may also be appropriate in other sections of the application.

The reasonableness of the data sharing plan or the rationale for not sharing research data will be assessed by the reviewers. However, reviewers will not factor the proposed data sharing plan into the determination of scientific merit or the priority score.

Data Confidentiality

The AHRQ confidentiality statute, 42 USC 299c-3(c), requires that information that is obtained in the course of AHRQ supported activities and that identifies individuals or establishments be used only for the purpose for which it was supplied. Information that is obtained in the course of AHRQ-supported activities and that identifies an individual may be published or released only with the consent of the individual who supplied the information or is described in it. There are civil monetary penalties for violation of the confidentiality provision of the AHRQ statute. 42 USC 299c-3(d). In the Human Subjects section of the application, applicants must describe procedures for ensuring the confidentiality of the identifying information to be collected (see NOT-HS-18-012: Confidentiality in AHRQ-Supported Research). The description of the procedures should include a discussion of who will be permitted access to this information, both raw data and machine-readable files, and how personal identifiers and other identifying or identifiable data will be restricted and safeguarded. Identifiable patient health information collected by recipient under this RFA will also be obtained and managed in accordance with the HIPAA Privacy Rule, 45 CFR Parts 160 and 164. 

The recipient should ensure that computer systems containing confidential data have a level and scope of security that equals or exceeds that established by the HIPAA Security Rules if applicable (see HIPAA website in prior paragraph) and that established by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in OMB Circular No. A-130, Appendix III - Security of Federal Automated Information Systems. The applicability and intended means of applying these confidentiality and security standards to subcontractors and vendors, if any, should be addressed in the application.

Sharing Research Resources: Rights in Data

Unless otherwise provided in grant awards, AHRQ recipients may copyright, or seek patents for, as appropriate, final and interim products and materials developed in whole or in part with AHRQ support, including, but not limited to, methodological tools, measures, software with documentation, literature searches, and analyses. Such copyrights and patents are subject to a royalty-free, non-exclusive, and irrevocable AHRQ license to reproduce, publish, use or disseminate for any purpose consistent with AHRQ’s statutory responsibilities and to authorize others to do so for any purpose consistent with AHRQ’s statutory responsibilities. In accordance with its legislative dissemination mandate, AHRQ purposes may include, subject to statutory confidentiality protections, making project materials, databases, results, and algorithms available for verification or replication by other researchers.  In addition, subject to AHRQ budget constraints, final products may be made available to the healthcare community and the public by AHRQ or its agents if such distribution would significantly increase access to a product and thereby produce substantial or valuable public health benefits.  Ordinarily, to accomplish distribution, AHRQ publicizes research findings but relies on recipients to publish research results in peer-reviewed journals and to market grant-supported products.  AHRQ requests that recipients notify the Office of Communications (OC) when an AHRQ-funded research article has been accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Researchers should submit manuscripts that have been accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal to [email protected] at least four to six weeks in advance of the journal’s expected publication date. 

Regulations applicable to AHRQ recipients concerning intangible rights and copyright can be found at 45 CFR 75.322.

The mission of AHRQ is to produce evidence to make healthcare safer, higher quality, more accessible, equitable, and affordable, and to work with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and other partners to make sure that the evidence is understood and used. 

AHRQ's priority areas of focus are detailed here: https://www.ahrq.gov/funding/policies/nofoguidance/index.html.

As part of this mission, applications are submitted to AHRQ to support health services research which are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the AHRQ peer review system.

Applications that are complete and responsive to the NOFO will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate objective group convened in accordance with standard AHRQ peer-review procedures that are described in 42 CFR Part 67, Subpart A.  Incomplete and/or non-responsive applications or applications not following instructions given in this NOFO will not be reviewed.  Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process.

Merit Review Criteria: Merit Review Criteria, as described below, will be considered in the review process.

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

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

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

Is the expected impact on equity attainable through the proposed study? Is the project likely to result in D&I evidence that can contribute to better understanding how to scale the intervention or apply it to other settings and populations?

Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? 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?

• Is the single PD/PI, or are the multiple PD(s)/PI(s) combined, devoting at least 20% annual full-time effort (i.e., at least 8 hours per week) in each given year of the project?
• Has the applicant demonstrated competency among the PI/PD and team with respect to disparities and equity research?

• Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by using 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?
• How novel are the proposed approaches to address contextual factors impacting inequities?
• Does the applicant propose involvement of sectors and community that have not been historically engaged in addressing barriers to equitable care delivery?

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?

If the project involves human subjects and/or 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?

Have the applicants:

• described how a holistic/participatory approach will be used to center equity and ensure the voices of stakeholder and community members from underserved and priority populations are reflected in all stages of the research process; description should detail methods and role of partners, stakeholders, and community, any reflection on potential limitations to approach;
• described how the project will address priorities of underserved population(s), including those who experience persistent poverty and other socioeconomic inequalities to achieve overall research and health equity goals;
• described the EBI(s) selection (why and how) to ensure advances in equitable care delivery (including considerations of de-implementation and adaptations), and clearly describe the primary outcome measure(s);
• described selection of study designs and methodologies (i.e., alternative or pragmatic) used to maximize equity and inclusion of diverse contexts, populations, while balancing aspects of scientific rigor, such as reliability, external and internal validity;
• included a graphic framework/model and corresponding description to
  • illustrate how the EBI(s) and research approach addresses evidence gaps (transparency of logic and assumptions);
  • show hypothesized relationships between various elements to reach the desired outcome (advancing equity);
  • this model should also delineate/or align with elements/metrics for the implementation and impact evaluation including but not limited to: contextual factors ranging from the populations characteristics, features of setting in which the EBI(s) is being delivered, connections to systems and sectors outside of healthcare setting, role of social determinates of health, cultural, organizational, and structural factors including attention to discrimination/racism at multiple levels (structural, institutional, and personally mediated) in the healthcare systema framework or model and corresponding description of how the model will be used to center equity and how the EBI(s) integrate into the model, and project answers evidence gaps;
  • model should delineate elements for the implementation and impact evaluation including but not limited to: contextual factors ranging from the populations characteristics, features of setting in which the EBI(s) is being delivered, connections to systems and sectors outside of healthcare setting, role of social determinates of health, cultural, organizational, and structural factors including attention to discrimination/racism at multiple levels (structural, institutional, and personally mediated) in the healthcare system;
• described equity-relevant metrics included in implementation and outcome evaluation, including measures of health equity and measures of both direct and indirect effects of contextual factors impacting health equity and reflection on potential limitations of current measures;
• addressed elements of scalability, sustainability, and dissemination including the role of participatory methods that foster inclusion of partner, stakeholder, community (end-users) voice.

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

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

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

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

For details regarding IRB approval, applicants may refer to the "AHRQ Revised Policy for Institutional Review Board (IRB) Review of Human Subjects Protocols in Grant Applications" (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not-hs-00-003.html). Applicant should also be aware of the AHRQ policy for use of single IRB for cooperative research, 45 CFR 46.114 (b)  https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-HS-20-005.html.

Peer reviewers will assess the adequacy of plans to address the needs of AHRQ priority populations. 

Peer reviewers must include their assessment of the proposed inclusion plan for priority populations in evaluating the overall scientific and technical merit of the application and assigning the impact score.

In evaluating the overall impact of the application, the review groups will:

• Evaluate the application for the presence or absence of the inclusion plan based on the proposed research objectives.
• Evaluate the adequacy of the proposed plan for the inclusion of priority populations.
• Evaluate the proposed justification for the exclusion of priority populations when a requirement for inclusion is described as inappropriate with respect to the purpose of the research.
• Evaluate the plans for outreach and recruitment of study participants, including priority populations, where appropriate.
• Evaluate the proposed plan for study design, execution and outcome assessments so that study results will be relevant to one or more priority populations, where appropriate.
• Assess the plan as being acceptable or unacceptable with regard to the appropriateness of the inclusion or exclusion of priority populations in the proposed research.

Reviewers will assess how well the application addresses the purpose and objectives of this NOFO. How responsive is the application to the special eligibility criteria, including the project requirements, noted in the NOFO?

The committee will evaluate whether the proposed budget is reasonable, and whether the requested period of support is appropriate in relation to the proposed research.

Not applicable

Not applicable

Not applicable

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

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, such as: Data Sharing Plan if applicable.

The reviewers will comment on whether the Data Management Plan is reasonable.

Not Applicable

Applications that are complete and responsive to the NOFO will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate Scientific Review Group convened in accordance with standard AHRQ peer review procedures that are described in 42 CFR Part 67, Subpart A. Incomplete and/or non-responsive applications or applications not following instructions given in this NOFO will not be reviewed.

As part of the scientific peer review, all 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.
• Will receive a written critique.

Applications will be assigned on the basis of established AHRQ referral guidelines to the appropriate AHRQ Office or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this NOFO.

The following will be considered in making funding decisions:

• Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as determined by scientific peer review.
• Availability of funds.
• Responsiveness to goals and objectives of the NOFO.
• Proposed approach to addressing health equity.
• Relevance and fit within AHRQ research priorities, as well as overall programmatic and geographic balance of the proposed project to program priorities.

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 HHS Grants Policy Statement (see https://www.ahrq.gov/funding/policies/hhspolicy/index.html).

If the application is under consideration for funding, AHRQ Division of Grants Management staff will request "Just-In-Time" information from the applicant. Just-In-Time information generally consists of information on other support, any additional information necessary to address administrative and budgetary issues, and certification of IRB approval of the project's proposed use of human subjects. For details regarding IRB approval, applicants may refer to the "AHRQ Revised Policy for Institutional Review Board (IRB) Review of Human Subjects Protocols in Grant Applications" (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not-hs-00-003.html). Applicant should also be aware of the AHRQ policy for use of single IRB for cooperative research, 45 CFR 46.114 (b) https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-HS-20-005.html.

If all administrative and programmatic issues are resolved, 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 AHRQ grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via email to the e-mail address designated by the recipient organization during the eRA Commons registration process.

Recipients must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.6. Funding Restrictions.

Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs. 

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

Any application awarded in response to this NOFO will be subject to the SAM Registration, and Transparency Act requirements as noted on the AHRQ web site at

https://www.ahrq.gov/funding/grant-mgmt/index.html.

All AHRQ grant and cooperative agreement awards are subject to OMB's Uniform Grant Guidance, HHS’s Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for HHS Awards, (http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt45.1.75, and the HHS Grants Policy Statement (see http://www.ahrq.gov/funding/policies/hhspolicy/index.html), and the terms and conditions set forth in the Notice of Award.

All applicants will be subject to a term and condition that applies the terms of 48 CFR section 3.908 to the award, and requires that recipients inform their employees in writing of employee whistleblower rights and protections under 41U.S.C. 4712 in the predominant native language of the workforce.

As necessary, additional Terms and Conditions will be incorporated into the NoA.

If you are successful and receive a Notice of Award, in accepting the award, you agree that the award and any activities thereunder are subject to all provisions of 45 CFR Part 75, 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.

AHRQ regulatory procedures that pertain to suspension and termination are specified in 45 CFR 75.371 through 75.375.

There is a prohibition on certain telecommunications and video surveillance services or equipment that became effective on or after August 13, 2020.

Should you successfully compete for an award, recipients of federal financial assistance (FFA) from HHS will be required to complete an HHS Assurance of Compliance form (HHS 690) in which you agree, as a condition of receiving the grant, to administer your programs in compliance with federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, sex and disability, and agreeing to comply with federal conscience laws, where applicable. This includes ensuring that entities take meaningful steps to provide meaningful access to persons with limited English proficiency; and ensuring effective communication with persons with disabilities. Where applicable, Title XI and Section 1557 prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, and gender identity, The HHS Office for Civil Rights provides guidance on complying with civil rights laws enforced by HHS. 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.

• For guidance on meeting your legal obligation to take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access to your programs or activities by limited English proficient individuals, see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/special-topics/limited-english-proficiency/fact-sheet-guidance/index.html and https://www.lep.gov.
• For information on your specific legal obligations for serving qualified individuals with disabilities, including providing program access, reasonable modifications, and to provide effective communication, see http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/understanding/disability/index.html.
• HHS funded health and education programs must be administered in an environment free of sexual harassment, see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/sex-discrimination/index.html.
• For guidance on administering your project in compliance with applicable federal religious nondiscrimination laws and applicable federal conscience protection and associated anti-discrimination laws, see https://www.hhs.gov/conscience/conscience-protections/index.html and https://www.hhs.gov/conscience/religious-freedom/index.html.

Contact the HHS Office for Civil Rights for more information about obligations and prohibitions under federal civil rights laws at

OCR Home | HHS.gov or call 1-800-368-1019 or TDD 1-800-537-7697.

AHRQ: Health Literacy Universal Precautions Toolkit

For additional guidance regarding how the provisions apply to AHRQ grant programs, please contact the Scientific/Research Contact that is identified in Section VII under Agency Contacts of this NOFO.

Health Literacy Below are available HHS resources.

HHS Health.gov: Health Literate Care Model

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), AHRQ awards will be subject to the Federal Recipient 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 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants.  This provision will apply to all AHRQ grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.

When multiple years are involved, recipients will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually unless specified otherwise in the terms of the award.

For details regarding annual progress report submission, refer to https://www.ahrq.gov/funding/grant-mgmt/noncomp.html. If instructions on the AHRQ website are different from the RPPR Instructions, follow the instructions on the AHRQ website. Annual progress reports are due 3 months before the start date of the next budget period of the award.

In addition to the annual Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) that is required of grants with multiple years of funding, awards under this NOFO carry the requirement to submit a Disparities Impact Statement as part of the RPPRs. Instructions on reporting requirements will be provided at the time of grant award. Conference calls with the AHRQ Program Official for the grant may also be required at the discretion of the Program Official.

Disparities Impact Statement:

Applicants must include a one-page Disparity Impact Statement and submit as part of the annually submitted RPPRs.

Please see suggested format on CMS.gov: https://www.cms.gov/About-CMS/Agency-Information/OMH/Downloads/Disparities-Impact-Statement-508-rev102018.pdf. For the purposes of this NOFO, references to organization in the CMS format should be interpreted to mean your project. Please refer questions to AHRQ contacts listed below.

Program planning and performance reporting requirements:

Recipient performance will be measured based on success in the following Program goals:

• Engagement: Who was engaged in this project?
• Performance measures: list number and description of all sector, community, and research partners involved in development, implementation, and evaluation.
• Timeline: list updated each project year.
• Process: How were D&I strategies and participatory approaches used in project?
• Performance measures: list, type, and use of strategies anchored in D&I and CBPR.
• Timeline: list updated each project year.
• Impact: Do implementation and outcomes improve, based on the evaluation.
• Performance measures: one or more core implementation and outcome metrics to be approved by AHRQ will be collected from the evaluation data.
• Timeline: specific outcomes determined in each year and data collected through final year. Updated project disparities impact statement by year 2 and each subsequent year.

Recipients are required to submit expenditure data on the Federal Financial Report (FFR; SF 425) annually.

Expenditure data is to be reported on the Federal Financial Report (FFR; SF 425). AHRQ requires annual financial expenditure reports for ALL grant programs as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement (https://www.ahrq.gov/funding/policies/hhspolicy/index.html).  AHRQ implementation of the FFR retains a financial reporting period that coincides with the budget period of a particular project.  However, the due date for annual FFRs is 90 days after the end of the calendar quarter in which the budget period ends. For example, if the budget period ends 4/30/2023, the annual FFR is due 9/30/2023 (90 days after the end of the calendar quarter of 6/30/2023).

A final Progress Report, final Federal Financial Report, and Final Invention Statement are required when an award ends.  All final reports are due within 120 days of the project period end date.  For further details regarding grant closeout requirements, refer to Post Award Grants Management | Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (ahrq.gov)

AHRQ NOFOs outline intended research goals and objectives. Post award, AHRQ 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 AHRQ grants and cooperative agreements are required to report to the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at www.fsrs.gov on all subawards over the threshold. See the HHS Grants Policy Statement (http://www.ahrq.gov/funding/policies/hhspolicy/index.html) for additional information on this reporting requirement.

In accordance with the regulatory requirements provided at 45 CFR 75.113 and 2 CFR Part 200.113 and Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75 and 2 CFR Part 200, recipients that have currently active Federal grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from all Federal awarding agencies with a cumulative total value greater than $10,000,000 for any period of time during the period of performance of a Federal award, must report and maintain the currency of information reported in the System for Award Management (SAM) about civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings in connection with the award or performance of a Federal award that reached final disposition within the most recent five-year period.  The recipient must also make semiannual disclosures regarding such proceedings. Proceedings information will be made publicly available in the designated integrity and performance system (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 and 2 CFR Part 200 Award Term and Condition for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.

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

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

Finding Help Online: https://www.era.nih.gov/need-help (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)

Email: [email protected] (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-480-7075

Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: [email protected]

Chivonne Walker
Office of Extramural Research, Education and Priority Populations
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Email: [email protected]

Xavier Bogle
Division of Scientific Review
Office of Extramural Research, Education, and Priority Populations
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Email: [email protected]

Anna Caponiti
Office of Management Services
Division of Grants Management
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Email: [email protected]

Recently issued AHRQ policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by AHRQ is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. Notices can also be found at AHRQ Grants Policy Notices.

This program is described in the Assistance Listings (formerly called the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance) at https://sam.gov/content/home and is not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health Systems Agency review.

Awards are made under the authority of 42 USC 299 et seq., and in accordance with 45 CFR Part 75 and other referenced applicable statutes and regulations. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement. The HHS Grants Policy Statement can be found at http://www.ahrq.gov/funding/policies/hhspolicy/index.html.