Required Application Instructions

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

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

The purpose of this program is to strengthen the research and training capacity/infrastructure at eligible institutions of higher education to facilitate minority health and health disparities research. NIMHD Research Endowment grants are made to create a permanent institutional endowment fund to support institutional resources and research capacity building. 'Institutional endowment' refers to corporate or system-wide endowment fund that is the sum total of the endowment assets of all campuses and their components. This includes, but is not limited to, endowments managed by an institution’s foundations/associations as well as state university systems. The NIMHD Research Endowment Program does not directly support research projects itself. Specific activities may be designed to include, but are not limited to:

• Strengthen the research infrastructure through the renovation of facilities, purchase of state-of-the-art instruments and equipment, and enhance information technology;
• Enhance the academic environment by creating challenging courses in such topics as research methodology and health disparities as additions to the curriculum; and
• Enhance the recruitment and retention of faculty with exceptional expertise in the biomedical, clinical, behavioral, and social sciences.

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

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)

Public Law 111-148 restricts eligible applicants of this program to public/private institutions of higher education that have current HRSA Centers of Excellence awards under Section 736 of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act or NIMHD Centers of Excellence awards under Section 464z-4 of the PHS Act. (see the list of institutions with current HRSA Centers of Excellence on the HRSA website at and the list of institutions with current NIMHD Centers of Excellence on the NIMHD website at http://www.nimhd.nih.gov/fundedPgmList/coeList-p20.html and http://www.nimhd.nih.gov/fundedPgmList/coeList-p60.html.)

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.

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.

• Dun and Bradstreet Universal Numbering System (DUNS) - All registrations require that applicants be issued a DUNS number. 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.
• System for Award Management (SAM) (formerly CCR) 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.
• eRA Commons - Applicants must have an active DUNS number and SAM registration in order to complete the eRA Commons registration. Organizations can register with the eRA Commons as they are working through their SAM or Grants.gov registration. 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 DUNS number and 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.

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.

The contact PD/PI must be a senior administrative official such as the President, Chancellor, Academic Vice President, or Dean of the applicant institution.

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

Only one application per institution (normally identified by having a unique DUNS number or NIH IPF number) is allowed.

The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time. 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 NOT-OD-11-101).

Institutions are no longer eligible to receive more than a total of 10 years of support under the NIMHD Research Endowment Program. Institutions that have already received 10 or more years of endowment support from the NIMHD are not eligible to apply under this FOA.

Institutional Endowment Assets

Pursuant to Public Law 111-148 the corporate or system-wide endowment must be less than/or equal to one-half of the national median of endowment funds at institutions that conduct biomedical research or training of health professionals. For the purpose of determining the endowment threshold for eligibility under this FOA, the endowment assets of institutions categorized as Research Institutions-Specialized Health Professions by the Carnegie Classification were assessed. The data for this assessment were taken from the results of the National Association of College and University Business Officials (NACUBO) 2014 Endowment Study (NACUBO: Public NCSE Tables). The NACUBO Endowment Study is widely recognized as the industry standard for tracking the performance and management of college and university endowment assets.

Based on the NIMHD analysis, the estimated median value of system-wide endowment assets of $510,767,000 will be considered the national median; and $255,384,000 is fifty percent of that amount. Therefore, institutions with corporate or system-wide endowments that exceed $255,384,000 may not apply for an endowment grant award under this FOA.

Applicants must download the SF424 (R&R) application package associated with this funding opportunity using the Apply for Grant Electronically button in this FOA or following the directions provided at Grants.gov.

It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, including Supplemental Grant Application Instructions 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.

For information on Application Submission and Receipt, visit Frequently Asked Questions Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications.

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 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:

Maryline Laude-Sharp, PhD
Telephone: 301-451-9536
Fax: 301-480-4049
Email: [email protected]

All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed, with the following exceptions or additional requirements:

• For this specific FOA, the Research Strategy section is limited to 12 pages.

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.

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

Estimated Project Funding:

Total Federal Funds: This number should not be zero. The application will be processed, but a concern may be raised during review.

Total Federal and non-Federal Funds: This number should not be zero. The application will be processed, but a concern may be raised during review.

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:

Are Human Subjects Involved: Answer to human subject involvement should be "NO".

Other Attachments: Three Other Attachments are required and must be submitted as separate files:

• Certified or notarized letter/report from an independent auditor with original signatures stating the dollar amount of the applicant s institutional corporate or system-wide endowment assets. This document must include a statement reflecting the dollar amount of all endowment funds of the corporate institution that are managed by the applicant institution, private non-profit foundations and/or public entities established by or for the benefit of the institution. In addition, if an applicant institution is a part of a state university system, the certified letter or report must contain an explanation as to how the component benefits from state appropriations, specifically how state appropriations strengthen the institution s infrastructure, capacity and programs.
• Certified or notarized letter/report from an independent auditor with original signatures stating the amount of the institution’s State, Federal, and private research and development dollars. This should include the amount of funds allocated to the institution’s professional and graduate science programs system-wide.
• An Investment Policy Statement representing a plan for investing the proposed endowment corpus. Indicate long-term and short-term investment goals and expected rate of return. The investment plan should be balanced and take into consideration the volatility of markets. Given the high significance placed on retaining the market value of the endowment corpus, at a minimum, care should be taken to develop an investment and spending plan to ensure that the market value of the corpus is not invaded. Institutions with limited experience in establishing and managing endowment funds are encouraged to consult with institutions and/or other entities that have expertise in establishing and managing such funds.
• It is permissible to pool the NIMHD endowment corpus with other endowment assets held by the institution for investment purposes. In these cases, the proportionate income (or units) of the NIMHD research endowment fund should be separately accounted for and used only for the purposes specified within this FOA. Additions to the fund from any successive NIHMD Endowment award should be administered in accordance with this practice.

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

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

This FOA calls for the budget to be itemized in multiple sections. Each budget section addresses a specific aspect of the grant. With regard to the initial budget period, spell out and justify the actual budget request (which is the same as the requested endowment corpus). The direct costs requested for each year of the project period should reflect only the endowment corpus not projected income. These yearly requested direct costs are entered under the appropriate year on F. Other Direct Cost, Line 8. Indirect costs are not allowed.

This budget justification should specify how projected endowment income, at a given level, will be spent to support programmatic activities and achieve program objectives. The budget justification should relate project expenses to grant objectives and describe what objectives and program purposes are being supported by the grant and/or the institution and to what extent.

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:

Research Strategy: Applicants must develop a 5-Year Endowment Strategic Plan that establishes priorities for the use and growth of endowment fund income. Note: endowment fund income cannot be used to directly fund research projects of any type. The required elements of this Strategic Plan are:

• The institution’s Mission Statement for the plan.
• An Overview of the institution’s strategy for building capacity and research infrastructure to facilitate population health and health disparities research.
• The Area(s) of Emphasis in priority order addressed by the plan.
• The Rationale that explains the public health need, scientific opportunity, and /or the institution’s reason for pursuing the area(s) of emphasis. This should include an explanation as to how the plan will contribute to improving minority health and health disparities research activities at the institution.
• Clearly identified Objectives related to the area(s) of emphasis, with an indication of relative priority.
• An Action Plan that consists of: (1) a description of the concrete activities that will enhance and expand the institutional research capacity in minority health and/or health disparities (e.g., research training opportunities, improvements in the physical plant, equipment acquisition, enhancement of academic curriculum, and/or recruitment/retention of accomplished scientists in the fields of biomedical, behavioral, and social sciences research) your institution will take to achieve each Objective; (2) a timeline for achieving key targets of the Objective; and (3) an estimated date by which the Objective is expected to be accomplished. An estimate of total dollars needed to achieve each Objective for each of the five years of the Endowment Strategic Plan should be included in the narrative for the Action Plan.
• A description of Performance Measures (process and outcome) that will be utilized to demonstrate the accomplishments of each Objective.
• Projected impact of the endowment income including explanation of the institution’s commitment to the programmatic aspects of the proposed endowment fund program contained in the 5-Year Endowment Strategic Plan.

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:

• Generally, Resource Sharing Plans are expected, but they are not applicable for this FOA.

Appendix: Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates. 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.

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. 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.

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.

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 Applying Electronically. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Guidelines for Applicants Experiencing System Issues.

Important reminders:

All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile Component of the SF424(R&R) Application Package. 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 DUNS number it provides 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.

Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in NOT-OD-13-030.

Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. As part of the NIH mission, all applications submitted to the NIH in support of biomedical and behavioral research are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.

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? 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? Does the 5-Year Endowment Strategic Plan enhance and expand institutional resource capacity in minority health and/or health disparities research? Are the proposed uses of the endowment funds appropriate to the goals of enhancement of biomedical, behavioral and health disparities research?

Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or New Investigators, or 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?

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?

Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? 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? Will the activities identified in the plan enhance and expand the institutional research capacity in minority health and/or health disparities (e.g., research training opportunities, improvements in the physical plant, equipment acquisition, enhancement of academic curriculum, and/or recruitment/retention of accomplished scientists in the fields of biomedical, behavioral, and social sciences research)? Are the proposed management of the endowment fund and effectiveness of investment strategy appropriate to achieve appropriate growth potential while taking into consideration the volatility of the markets?

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 children, justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?

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 six 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 six 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.

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 children 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.

The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following five points: 1) proposed use of the animals, and species, strains, ages, sex, and numbers to be used; 2) justifications for the use of animals and for the appropriateness of the species and numbers proposed; 3) adequacy of veterinary care; 4) procedures for limiting discomfort, distress, pain and injury to that which is unavoidable in the conduct of scientifically sound research including the use of analgesic, anesthetic, and tranquilizing drugs and/or comfortable restraining devices; and 5) methods of euthanasia and reason for selection if not consistent with the AVMA Guidelines on Euthanasia. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section.

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.

Not Applicable

For Renewals, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.

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.

Not Applicable

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).

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 Wide Association Studies (GWAS) /Genomic Data Sharing Plan.

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

Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by NIMHD, 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:

• 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.

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 Council on Minority Health and Health Disparities. 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.

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.

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

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 grantee’s business official.

Awardees 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.

NIMHD endowment awards are made to the existing institutional endowment fund to support institutional resources and research capacity building. Amounts, which may be expended each year, are to be determined pursuant to spending rules under the law of the State in which the institution is located, subject to the special limitation on expenditures during the first year following the Notice of Award letter, which is set forth below.

To ensure maximum growth of the endowment fund, the following guidelines govern how an NIMHD Research Endowment is to be implemented. The following Terms and Conditions will be incorporated into the Notice of Award (NoA) letter and will be provided to the Program Director/Principal Investigator as well as to the appropriate institutional official, at the time of award.

• Direct costs of this award are restricted: except to the extent permissible by the spending rules under the law of the State in which the institution is located. The endowment corpus may not be expended for any reason.
• Funds to be utilized will be the income and capital appreciation distributable under the institution’s spending rule as a result of the investment of the endowment corpus as proposed in the grantee’s 5-year strategic plan that is part of the application and that establishes priorities for the use of the endowment fund. Income and capital appreciation earned must be reported as Program Income in accordance with the NIH Grants Policy Statement guidelines.
• Funds must be invested, according to the Investment Policy Statement and the 5-year strategic plan included in the grantee’s application, no later than 90 days after the start date of the endowment grant.
• Any income and capital appreciation realized in the initial year of the award is not to be expended to support programmatic activities until it has accrued for one full year from the budget period start date listed on the initial Notice of Award (NoA). For each year of funding during its project period, programmatic activities may be supported, in general, by part of the income and capital appreciation earned on the previous year’s investment as determined under the institutional spending rule. For instance, if an institution receives an award of $2 million per year, for five consecutive years, no programmatic activities could receive support from the endowment income and capital appreciation until Year 2. Year 2 programs could be supported by distributions of the income and capital appreciation earned on the initially invested $2 million under the institution’s spending rule. Year 3 activities would be supported by income and capital appreciation accrued on the endowment corpus. Programmatic activities in subsequent years could be similarly supported by income and capital appreciation earned on the endowment corpus.
• In the case of situations in which investment conditions result in the endowment corpus having a net market value less than the value of the funds at the time of their receipt, action should be taken in order to preserve the endowment corpus.
• Prior written approval is required from NIMHD for any deviations from the 5-year strategic plan submitted in the competing application.
• For renewal awards, the endowment amount for the new project period is added to the previous accumulated endowment corpus and only a single continuation progress report that encompasses all activities is submitted.

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, Grantees, and Activities. More information is provided at Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants.

Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award

Not Applicable

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

Prior written approval from the NIMHD is required for any deviation from the five-year strategic plan as submitted in the competing application. In addition to the standard reports required of all grantees, research endowment grantees need to provide specific information related to the type and amount of investments of the fund, the amount of fund income (including the 12-month income since the last reporting period for all prior years awarded) and the amount and purpose of expenditures of fund income.

Due to the unique nature of the endowment program, 20 years of annual progress reporting is required after the end of the project period. The entire endowment fund corpus must be maintained and not spent for twenty years after the grant’s project period end date. After the end of the twenty year period, while the grantee institution is encouraged to preserve the corpus, the institution may use the endowment fund corpus for any purpose that expands or develops the institution’s minority health and/or health disparities research capacity.

A final progress report, 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.

The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Transparency Act), includes a requirement for awardees of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later. All awardees 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.

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 registration, submitting and tracking an application, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, post submission issues)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
Finding Help Online: http://grants.nih.gov/support/index.html
Email: [email protected]

Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and submission, downloading forms and application packages)
Contact CenterTelephone: 800-518-4726
Web ticketing system: https://grants-portal.psc.gov/ContactUs.aspx
Email: [email protected]

GrantsInfo (Questions regarding application instructions and process, finding NIH grant resources)
Email: [email protected] (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-710-0267

Nathan Stinson, Jr, PhD, MD
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMH)
Telephone: 301-594-8704
Email: [email protected]

Maryline Laude-Sharp, PhD
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD)
Telephone: 301-451-9536
Email: [email protected]

Priscilla Grant, JD
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD)
Telephone: 301-594-8412
Email: [email protected]

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.

Awards are made under the authorization of Section 464z-3 (42 USC 285t), Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Part 75.