National Institutes of Health (NIH)
NIH Basic Behavioral and Social Science Opportunity Network (OppNet http://oppnet.nih.gov/) and its member institutes, centers and offices:
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
Funding Opportunity Title
Basic Research on Decision Making: Cognitive, Affective, and Developmental Perspectives (R01)
R01 Research Project Grant
Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Number
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s)
93.113, 93.121, 93.142, 93.143, 93.172,93.173, 93.213, 93.233, 93.242, 93.273 ,93.279 ,93.286 ,93.307, 93.361, 93.389,93.393, 93.394, 93.395,93.396, 93.399, 93.837, 93.838, 93.846, 93.847, 93.853, 93.855, 93.856, 93.859, 93.865, 93.866, 93.867, 93.879, 93.989
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA), issued as part of the NIH Basic Behavioral and Social Sciences Opportunity Network (OppNet), encourages research grant applications that propose to increase understanding of the basic cognitive, affective, motivational, and social processes that underlie decision making across the lifespan. This includes an appreciation of the interactions among the psychological, neurobiological, and behavioral processes in decision making. It also includes consideration of the mediating and/or moderating influences of genetics, physiology, the social environment, and culture.
September 2, 2011
Open Date (Earliest Submission Date)
December 18, 2011
Letter of Intent Due Date
December 18, 2011
Application Due Date(s)
January 18, 2012, by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization.
AIDS Application Due Date(s)
Scientific Merit Review
Advisory Council Review
Earliest Start Date(s)
September 1, 2012
January 19, 2012
Due Dates for E.O. 12372
Required Application Instructions
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF 424 (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
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA), issued as part of the NIH Basic Behavioral and Social Sciences Opportunity Network (OppNet), encourages research grant applications that propose to increase understanding of the basic cognitive, affective, motivational, and social processes that underlie decision making across the lifespan. This includes an appreciation of the interactions among the psychological, neurobiological, and behavioral processes in decision making. It also includes consideration of the mediating and/or moderating influences of genetics, physiology, the social environment, and culture. While the decision sciences have produced a rich literature in some of these areas, certain topics are only beginning to be addressed.
Decision Making Across the Life Span: One such understudied area is change over the life span in psychological and physiological processes integral to decision making. For example, developmental neuroscience is just beginning to reveal different maturational trajectories in systems for cognitive control and emotional processing. OppNet seeks to expand explorations of how these trajectories impact decision-related processes such as risk behavior, intertemporal choice, and sensitivity to positive or negative incentives at different stages of the life course, from early childhood through late adulthood.
In young children, development of abilities to sustain attention and working memory, apply rules and assess risk, and perceive signals important for making adaptive choices depends on complex interactions among genetics, environment, and brain development. The salience of specific social and emotional factors, such as the influence of peers on risky decision-making, may be quite different at different ages and stages of development. And despite widespread stereotypes of adolescent impulsivity, research suggests that older adults are also subject to significant emotional influences on decision making, but that the nature of these influences differs over the life course
In addition, individual differences in cognition, perception, and socioemotional capacities may emerge at various junctures in development and influence developmental trajectories and outcomes. How individual differences in aspects of personality, motivation, discount rates, risk preferences, and loss aversion impact decision making is just beginning to be studied using approaches that integrate psychology, economics, genetics and neuroscience. To more fully understand how decisions arise from the interplay of psychological, behavioral, physiological, and social processes across the lifespan, OppNet encourages cross-disciplinary approaches.
Interactions of Cognition and Emotion: Another challenge is to increase understanding of the neurobiological, behavioral, and social processes by which emotion and cognition interact in decision making. Dual process theory proposes that affective and cognitive processes are separate and potentially competing. On the other hand, there is an extremely high degree of neural connectivity and integration of information in brain areas subserving cognitive and emotional functions. To address this apparent paradox, this OppNet FOA seeks to support multidisciplinary investigations of the bidirectional relationship between the cognitive and affective processes involved in decision making (e.g., how the interplay of cognition and affect influences the perceived salience of information, reward processing, computation of value, decision conflict, and risk behavior). Cognitive domains of interest include attention, perception, learning, memory, and executive function. Affective domains of interest include emotional valence, arousal, and discrete emotions. Other important understudied areas include the influence of affective information (e.g. the perception of emotional expressions; the emotional impact of decisions) on choice, the impact of individual differences in emotional regulatory capacity on decision making, and the role of emotional goals in shaping choices.
Behavioral Economics and Neuroeconomics: Newly emerging research in behavioral economics, neuroeconomics, and decision neuroscience combines the formalized mathematical models derived from economics with psychological theories, behavioral models, and neuroscientific approaches to examine basic principles of choice behavior and how these are implemented in the brain. Research in behavioral economics extends traditional models of economic behavior of individuals and institutions by incorporating psychological insights about constraints on pure rationality and the ways that incentives and institutional structures can bias choice. Neuroeconomic research examines the neurobiological underpinnings of processes such as value estimation, risk taking, reward processing, and delay discounting; it is revealing the tight integration of cognitive and affective processes in these functions. Related approaches in social and affective neuroscience are exploring the extent to which systems for processing monetary and social incentives draw on common or distinct neural circuits. There is far less understanding of the neurobiological or genetic factors that underlie individual differences in these decision-related behaviors, and the extent to which these are context dependent.
This initiative seeks to increase basic research on these topics, as these approaches may ultimately prove fruitful for identifying basic mechanisms and processes that support adaptive decision making of relevance to multiple domains of health and life-course related behavior.
Behavioral economic and psychological research on decision making also extends to the study of biases and heuristics (including cognitive schemas), and the extent to which these are adaptive or maladaptive. Biases such as loss aversion, errors in affective forecasting, present bias, ambiguity effect, base-rate neglect, and susceptibility to framing effects have not been studied across the life course. More work is needed to delineate how factors in the social environment can affect the decision-making process. Differences in the structure of institutions, the source of information, or the mode of data presentation can systematically bias decision making (e.g., through nudges, policies, or practices that constrain choices). The degree to which poverty, wealth, socioeconomic status, culture, and gender bias decision making also merits further study.
Scope and Specific Requirements
Applications submitted in response to this FOA are expected to propose projects that will further our understanding of the basic behavioral and social mechanisms and processes involved in decision making, and contribute to unifying scientific inquiry across a wide range of biological, behavioral, and social science disciplines that examine judgment and decision making. This FOA encourages applications that clarify relationships among cognitive, affective, motivational, and social processes across levels of analysis and over the life course. Approaches to these questions may include model animals, laboratory-based human research, and social science projects in real-world, ecological settings. Due to the complex nature of this research, OppNet encourages formation of multidisciplinary research teams.
Applications in response to this OppNet initiative must clearly focus on the basic behavioral and social mechanisms and processes involved in decision making. Applied research (e.g., intervention research, research on decision making as it relates to specific diseases, health conditions, or treatment outcomes) will be deemed non-responsive to the FOA. As defined by NIH, applied research in the behavioral and social sciences is designed to predict or influence health outcomes, risks, or protective factors. It is also concerned with the impact of illness or risk for illness on behavioral or social functioning. By definition, an intervention study is considered applied research.
Basic behavioral and social science research can be conducted within the context of a clinical setting, when the focus is on explaining behavioral or social mechanisms. Based on the NIH definition, the following would be considered applied research and would not be deemed responsive: A study that examined how variations in framing treatment choices affected medical outcomes. In comparison, the following would be considered basic research and would be responsive to this FOA: A study that sought to understand the cognitive mechanisms linking the framing of choices to decision outcomes in general, even if conducted within a medical setting.
OppNet is a trans-NIH initiative that funds activities to build the collective body of knowledge about the nature of behavior and social systems, and that deepen our understanding of basic mechanisms of behavioral and social processes. All 24 NIH Institutes and Centers that fund research and four Program Offices within the NIH Office of the Director (ICOs) co-fund and co-manage OppNet. All OppNet initiatives invite investigators to propose innovative research that will advance a targeted domain of basic social and behavioral sciences and produce knowledge and/or tools of potential relevance to multiple domains of health- and lifecourse-related research. Applicants should understand that the NIH Institute or Center (IC) that made this FOA available to the public is not necessarily the NIH IC that ultimately will manage a funded OppNet project. Instead, OppNet assigns funding and project management of meritorious applications to the NIH IC whose scientific mission most closely corresponds to that of the proposed research project.
For more information about OppNet and all its funding opportunities, visit http://oppnet.nih.gov.
OppNet uses the NIH definition of basic behavioral and social science research (b-BSSR) (http://obssr.od.nih.gov/about_obssr/BSSR_CC/BSSR_definition/definition.aspx) to determine application responsiveness. Consequently, OppNet strongly encourages prospective investigators to consult this definition, OppNet’s answers to frequently asked questions about b-BSSR (http://oppnet.nih.gov/about-faqs.asp), and the Scientific Contacts section of this FOA for individuals with expertise in the research subject matter and the OppNet initiative.
Specific Areas of Research Interest
Below are examples of how cross-disciplinary science could enhance our understanding of the basic behavioral and social processes and mechanisms underlying decision making. This list is not meant to be exhaustive, but only to provide examples of appropriate topics. For feedback on specific topics, please consult the program staff listed in Section VII.
Interactions between Cognition and Emotion in Decision Making
Individual Differences in Decision Making
Social and Contextual Influences on Decision Making
Application Types Allowed
The OER Glossary and the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on these application types.
Funds Available and Anticipated Number of Awards
OppNet intends to commit approximately $3,000,000 in FY 2012 to fund 5 to 15 grants in response to this FOA.
The number of awards is contingent upon NIH appropriations, and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
Applications budgets may not exceed $500,000 direct costs per year.
Award Project Period
The total project period for an application submitted in response to this FOA may not exceed three years.
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
The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are eligible to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed.
Applicant organizations must complete the following registrations
as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply
for or receive an award. Applicants must have a valid Dun and Bradstreet
Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number in order to begin each of the following
All Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD/PIs) must
also work with their institutional officials to register with the eRA Commons
or ensure their existing eRA Commons account is affiliated with the eRA Commons
account of the applicant organization.
All registrations must be completed by the application due date. Applicant organizations are strongly encouraged to start the registration process at least four (4) weeks prior to the application due date.
Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources
necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director/Principal
Investigator (PD/PI) 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 SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide.
This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct.
NIH will not accept any application in response to this FOA that is essentially the same as one currently pending initial peer review unless the applicant withdraws the pending application. NIH will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one already reviewed.
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, 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:
The letter of intent should be sent to:
Janine Simmons, M.D., Ph.D.
Division of Neuroscience and Basic Behavioral Science
National Institute of Mental Health
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 7179, MSC 9637
Rockville, MD 20852-9637
Telephone: (301) 443-1576
The forms package associated with this FOA includes all applicable components, mandatory and optional. Please note that some components marked optional in the application package are required for submission of applications for this FOA. Follow all instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide to ensure you complete all appropriate optional components.
All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Resource Sharing Plan
Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans (Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model Organisms, and Genome Wide Association Studies; GWAS) as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Do not use the appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Foreign (non-US) institutions must follow policies described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, and procedures for foreign institutions described throughout the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates. Applicants are encouraged to submit in advance of the deadline to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission.
Organizations must submit applications via 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.
Applicants are responsible for viewing their application 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 SF 424 (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.
All PD/PIs must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile Component of the SF 424(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.
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 Central Contractor Registration (CCR). 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 and responsiveness by components of participating organizations, NIH. Applications that are incomplete and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in NOT-OD-10-115.
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/priority 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? How does the proposed research advance basic behavioral and social science research (b-BSSR) under the NIH definition?
Are the PD/PIs, 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? If the proposed research occurs in a specific context (e.g., clinical, disease-specific), how can its novel results inform basic social and behavioral research at large?
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
If the project involves clinical research, are the plans for 1) protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion of minorities and members of both sexes/genders, as well as the inclusion 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/priority score, but will not give separate scores for these items.
Protections for Human Subjects
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 Human Subjects Protection and Inclusion Guidelines.
Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children
When the proposed project involves clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion of minorities and members of both genders, as well as the inclusion of children. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Human Subjects Protection and Inclusion Guidelines.
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.
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/priority score.
Applications from Foreign Organizations
Reviewers will assess whether the project presents special opportunities for furthering research programs through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental conditions that exist in other countries and either are not readily available in the United States or augment existing U.S. resources.
Select Agent Research
Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).
Resource Sharing Plans
Reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources, are reasonable: 1) Data Sharing Plan; 2) Sharing Model Organisms; and 3) Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS).
Budget and Period of Support
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical
merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by the Center for Scientific Review, in accordance with NIH peer
review policy and procedures, using the stated review
criteria. Review assignments will be shown in the eRA Commons.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications:
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 appropriate National Advisory Council or Board. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
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
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 the DUNS, CCR Registration, and Transparency Act requirements as noted on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website.
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
When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the Non-Competing Continuation Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
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.
Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and
submission, downloading or navigating forms)
Contact Center Phone: 800-518-4726
GrantsInfo (Questions regarding application instructions and process, finding NIH grant resources)
eRA Commons Help Desk(Questions regarding eRA Commons registration, tracking application status, post submission issues)
Phone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
Examine your eRA Commons account for review assignment and contact information (information appears two weeks after the submission due date).
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 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 Parts 74 and 92.
Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices
Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health®
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.