Department of Health and Human Services

Part 1. Overview Information

Participating Organization(s)
National Institutes of Health (NIH)

Components of Participating Organizations

National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)

Funding Opportunity Title
Addressing Suicide Research Gaps: Aggregating and Mining Existing Data Sets for Secondary Analyses (R01 Clinical Trial Not Allowed)
Activity Code
R01 Research Project Grant
Announcement Type

Reissue of RFA-MH-18-400

Related Notices
July 26, 2019- Changes to NIH Requirements Regarding Proposed Human Fetal Tissue Research. See Notice NOT-OD-19-128

August 23, 2019- Clarifying Competing Application Instructions and Notice of Publication of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Regarding Proposed Human Fetal Tissue Research. See Notice NOT-OD-19-137

Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Number
RFA-MH-20-307
Companion Funding Opportunity

RFA-MH-20-305, R01 Research Project Grant

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s)

93.242

Funding Opportunity Purpose

This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) seeks to leverage data from existing basic, clinical, and intervention research on suicide risk and behaviors as well as social media and healthcare records data, by encouraging the integration of existing data sets for novel secondary analyses aimed at identifying potential biological, experiential, and other predictors, moderators, and mitigators of suicide risk. The use of dimensional variables and inclusion of multiple levels of analyses are particularly encouraged. A secondary goal of this FOA is to support innovative projects that will generate foundational work for research studies on suicide-related behaviors that inform a Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) approach in this area. Projects supported by this FOA will help address gaps identified in the 2014 Prioritized Research Agenda for Suicide Prevention. Applicants seeking to support efforts focused on linking pertinent data from healthcare system records (e.g., suicide attempt events) to mortality data so that a more accurate understanding of the risk factors for, and the burden of, suicide among those seen in structured healthcare settings can be discerned should apply to the companion NIMH Funding Announcement, RFA-MH-20-305  .

Key Dates

Posted Date

November 20, 2019

Open Date (Earliest Submission Date)
January 10, 2020
Letter of Intent Due Date(s)

January 10, 2020

Application Due Date(s)

February 10, 2020

No late applications will be accepted for this Funding Opportunity Announcement

All applications are due by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. All types of non-AIDS applications allowed for this funding opportunity announcement are due on the listed date(s).

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

AIDS Application Due Date(s)

Not Applicable

Scientific Merit Review

June 2020

Advisory Council Review

August 2020   

Earliest Start Date

December 2020

Expiration Date
February 11, 2020
Due Dates for E.O. 12372
Not Applicable
Required Application Instructions
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide,except where instructed to do otherwise (in this FOA or in a Notice from NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts ).

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

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

Table of Contents

Part 2. Full Text of Announcement

Section I. Funding Opportunity Description

Background

In 2017 there were more than 47,000 suicide deaths  in the United States. This staggering loss of life more than doubles the number of homicide deaths in the U.S. in the reporting period. The annual suicide rate in the U.S. has continued to climb over the past several decades and suicide is the 10th leading causes of death in the U.S. Compounding the impact of mortality, the rate of suicide attempts is many times higher than the rate of suicide death and the economic impact of suicidal behaviors has been estimated to exceed more than $50 billion annually in the U.S. Yet, as sobering and alarming as these statistics are, the low base rate occurrence and heterogeneous path for suicidal behaviors present significant challenges to clinicians attempting to detect and address such behaviors and researchers striving to better understand the trajectories of suicidal behavior. What has become clear, however, is that suicidal ideation, non-fatal and fatal attempts, often occur in the context of underlying mental health and substance use disorders.

The transdiagnostic path of suicidal ideation, attempts, and death vary across the lifespan, and are differentially influenced by factors such as gender, age, culture, and other experiential moderators. Given this heterogeneity, there are likely multiple behavioral and biological factors that interact with situational variables to confer elevated risk for suicide thoughts and behaviors (i.e., ideation, attempt, and death). Thus, by using a multifactorial and dimensional approach it may be possible to parse suicide behavior into component elements and identify smaller sets of variables that interact with each other to potentiate risk or protection. These variables may also then lend themselves to scrutiny by rigorous research analyses. Recent efforts in developing powerful computational tools have shown great promise in identifying subgroups of individuals with elevated predicted suicide risk or protection and have the potential for advancing personalized medicine goals. Leveraging computational approaches offers opportunities to better tailor interventions by identifying groups who could benefit from specific existing interventions or novel interventions.

In a continuing effort to engage experts focused on discovering and understanding the variety of behaviors and markers of suicidal behavior, the NIMH convened a workshop entitled “Mechanisms Underlying Suicide Risk: Integrating RDoC to Inform Novel and Personalized Intervention Research.” One theme distilled from this meeting was the need to leverage opportunities with existing datasets that when combined, could provide more power to detect various risk or protective trajectories. Aggregating data across multiple existing studies to bolster the ability to detect signals of suicidal behavior could prove fruitful. An expert panel reviewing suicide prevention approaches recommended probing existing data from preventive intervention trials, where intervention effects on suicide outcomes (e.g., ideation, attempts, deaths) could be examined along with intended targets that are also suicide risk factors (e.g., aggression, substance use, depression). Integrating existing prevention datasets could potentially be used to determine whether preventive interventions delivered earlier in life (prenatal through adolescence) have effects proximally and/or distally on suicidal ideation and behaviors, including long-term and/or cross-over effects (unanticipated beneficial effects). It would also allow for examining the impact of interventions on subpopulations (e.g., racial/ethnic minorities, sexual gender minorities). Yet another approach might be to systematically evaluate (typically large) existing healthcare data and social media that have previously not been closely examined for signals of suicidal behaviors. Efforts in this area might then serve as an incubator for novel prospective studies and could inform future Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) and computational psychiatry approaches for understanding suicidal behaviors. Responses solicited to a recent Request for Information from the NIMH (NOT-MH-16-027) support converging interest in pooling existing datasets and mining existing healthcare data as an important initial step to enhance signal detection and enable appropriately powered multi-factorial analyses.

Purpose/Research Objectives:

Given these many existing, untapped data resources, the purpose of this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) is to provide an opportunity for investigators to integrate and analyze datasets in a cost-efficient manner, to yield novel findings, to identify key scientific gaps, and to inform future research investments focused on identifying predictors of suicidal behaviors and quantifying risk. Better understanding of mechanisms and trajectories associated with suicide risk and behaviors can also facilitate the development of novel interventions and the refinement of preventive and therapeutic interventions that can be used to effectively reduce suicide risk. Data from these projects also offer the potential to inform understanding of how the measures of suicidal behavior in current studies and datasets might link to, or inform NIMH’s RDoC efforts. Understanding the mechanisms and trajectories of these behaviors has the potential to influence novel prevention and intervention development.

NIMH Specific Areas of Research Interest:

Projects proposed under this announcement could involve, but are not limited to the integration and analyses of datasets from:

  • Studies that were designed specifically to examine risk or protective factors for suicidal outcome
  • Studies that were designed to answer questions about mental health, substance use, or associated behaviors (i.e., studies that were not focusing on suicide outcomes, specifically, but include relevant suicide measures)
  • Large epidemiological samples that may contain either direct or indirect signals of suicide risk
  • Trials that focused on the treatment of mental disorders (i.e., to examine whether MH interventions reduce suicide risk)
  • Trials that focused on preventing mental health or substance use disorders (i.e., to examine whether interventions that target outcomes associated with risk for suicide afford suicide prevention)
  • Studies sponsored by industry, government, and private foundations that contain data of direct relevance to understanding suicidal behaviors
  • Studies that permit analysis of multiple levels for common constructs relevant to suicidal behaviors

Potential research approaches and questions include, but are not limited to:

  • Integrating data from social media with suicidal outcomes data to address research questions about suicide predictors and/or outcomes
  • Applying novel analyses (e.g., computational risk approaches) to large healthcare datasets to address research questions about suicide predictors and/or outcomes and to identify potential targets and inform timing of interventions
  • Examining the trajectory of acute intoxication, interpersonal distress and depression that can lead to suicide, in order to identify potential points for intervening
  • Exploring the role of opioids in suicidal ideation and behaviors
  • Employing contemporary computational approaches to explore whether predictors of death are similar to predictors of ideation and attempts, and to explore transitions in risk
  • Examining Risk factors and/or predictors of self-injury, suicide behaviors, and accidental death among patients with mental disorder comorbidities such as opioid misuse, other substance misuse, and alcohol misuse
  • Integrating suicide prevention data sets to examine whether the interventions reduce risk for subpopulations (e.g., racial/ethnic minority, sexual and gender minority, etc.)
  • Integrating prevention intervention data sets of youth in the child welfare and/or juvenile justice system to determine whether the interventions reduced risk for suicidal ideation and behaviors and to be able to examine mediators and moderators (e.g., age, racial/ethnic minority, sexual and gender minority, etc.)
  • Combining and analyzing data from prevention trials with other extant data (e.g., data from the National Death Index) to examine the impact of intervention on suicide
  • Integrating longitudinal studies that include suicidal ideation and behavior measures/scales to gain a better understanding of risk and protective factors for suicide at different stages of development
  • Integrating and analyzing data from prevention trials that target youth at-risk for mental disorders and other adverse outcomes (e.g., bullying prevention trials, child abuse/neglect prevention trials) to determine whether prevention with at-risk youth reduces suicide risk and to examine effects among subpopulations (e.g., racial/ethnic minority, sexual and gender minority, etc.)
  • Merging and analyzing data from mental health and/or substance abuse treatment studies to determine whether treatment reduces risk for suicidal ideation and behaviors and for whom (e.g., racial/ethnic minority, sexual and gender minority, age, etc.)

Scale and Scope of Studies Covered Under this Announcement

This FOA is intended to support the integration and analysis of datasets in a cost-efficient manner, to yield novel findings, to identify key scientific gaps, and to inform future research investments focused on identifying predictors of suicidal behaviors and quantifying risk. Better understanding of mechanisms and trajectories associated with suicide risk and behaviors can also facilitate the development of novel interventions and the refinement of preventive and/or therapeutic interventions that can be used to effectively reduce suicide risk. Data from these projects also offer potential to inform understanding of how the measures of suicidal behavior in current studies and datasets might link to, or inform NIMH’s RDoC efforts.

Applications that address questions using these combined/large datasets are particularly encouraged to include: 1) the identification of composite suicide risk and protective factors; 2) moderators and mediators of risk for suicidal behavior; and 3) identification of subgroups of populations (e.g., age, gender, racial/ethnic, cultural and sexual orientation differences) as they pertain to suicidal behaviors.

The National Library of Medicine has a website that lists NIH Data Sharing Repositories (https://www.nlm.nih.gov/NIHbmic/nih_data_sharing_repositories.html), where data dictionaries of shared studies can be reviewed for suicidal ideation and behavior measures. The NIMH Data Archive offers tools, such as Global Unique Identifiers (GUIDs) to address participant privacy, and allow data to be anonymized and shared (https://data-archive.nimh.nih.gov/ndct/s/nda/tools.html). The NIMH Data Archive is also willing to work with awardees to provide a private cloud-based storage site that will facilitate the proposed work. Applicants who are interested in exploring this possibility should contact the NIMH Data Archive help desk (ndahelp@mail.nih.gov). Sharing of datasets for broad research use is strongly encouraged, when appropriate. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) maintains a data archive of more than 250,000 files of research in the social and behavioral sciences, and can potentially be used as a resource for finding relevant data.

NIMH encourages the use of state-of-the art computational approaches. For applications that propose data harmonization and analytic/computational approaches for which there is limited feasibility information, a sound rationale should support why the proposed approach is the most appropriate and likely to generate an exceptionally high impact if successful.

NIMH encourages harmonization of databases where data can be publicly shared. When possible , investigators funded under this FOA are encouraged to share data via the NIMH Data Archive (https://data-archive.nimh.nih.gov/ndct/about ). The NIMH Data Archive is willing to work with applicants to determine what data can be shared (e.g., electronic medical record data; National Death Index acquired data). The NIMH Data Archive can also provide a private cloud-based storage site that will facilitate the proposed work. Applicants who are interested in exploring this possibility should contact the NIMH Data Archive help desk (ndahelp@mail.nih.gov).

Protection of Human Subjects: Applications with data collection plans that involve multiple respondent groups (e.g., clients/patients, therapists/providers, supervisors, administrators) should address provisions for human subject protections and consenting procedures for all participant groups, accordingly. The NIMH has published updated policies and guidance for investigators regarding human research protection and clinical research data and safety monitoring (NOT-MH-19-027). The application’s Protection of Human Subjects section and data and safety monitoring plans should reflect the policies and guidance in this notice. Plans for the protection of research subjects and data and safety monitoring will be reviewed by the NIMH for consistency with NIMH and NIH policies and federal regulations.

Potential applicants are strongly encouraged to consult with NIH staff as early as possible when developing plans for an application (see Scientific/Research Contacts, Section VII). This early contact will provide an opportunity to clarify NIH policies and guidelines and help to identify whether the proposed project is consistent with NIMH program priorities and the goals.

Non-responsive Applications

Applications that do not focus on primary variables of relevance to understanding suicidal behavior will be deemed non-responsive and will not be reviewed. Likewise, applications that are not strongly focused on identifying novel factors or composite approaches to better understand suicidal behaviors will be deemed non-responsive and will not be reviewed. This FOA is intended to support re-analysis of existing data: collection of new data is not allowed for this FOA, and applications will be deemed non-responsive if new data collection is proposed. The FOA is intended to support analysis of integrated data sets: applications that propose analysis of data from a single study/trial or parallel analyses of separate studies/trials are not considered responsive.

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

Section II. Award Information

Funding Instrument

Grant: A support mechanism providing money, property, or both to an eligible entity to carry out an approved project or activity.

Application Types Allowed
New

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

Clinical Trial?
Not Allowed: Only accepting applications that do not propose clinical trials

Need help determining whether you are doing a clinical trial?

Funds Available and Anticipated Number of Awards

NIMH intends to commit $3 million in FY 2021 to fund 4-6 meritorious applications.  

Award Budget

Application budgets are limited to $500,000 in direct costs (not including consortium F&A) in any project year, and need to reflect the actual needs of the proposed project.  

Award Project Period

The scope of the proposed project should determine the project period. The maximum project period is 4 years.  

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

Section III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants

Eligible Organizations

Higher Education Institutions

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

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

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

Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education

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

For-Profit Organizations

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

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)
  • Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions)
  • U.S. Territory or Possession
Other
  • Independent School Districts
  • Public Housing Authorities/Indian Housing Authorities
  • Native American Tribal Organizations (other than Federally recognized tribal governments)
  • Faith-based or Community-based Organizations
  • Regional Organizations
Foreign Institutions

Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are 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. 

Required Registrations

Applicant organizations

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

  • 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) – 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.
  • eRA Commons - Applicants must have an active DUNS number to register in eRA Commons. Organizations can register with the eRA Commons as they are working through their SAM or Grants.gov registration , but 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 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.

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

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

2. Cost Sharing

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

3. Additional Information on Eligibility

 

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

The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time.  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)

Section IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Requesting an Application Package

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

2. Content and Form of Application Submission

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

 

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:

NIMHpeerreview@mail.nih.gov

Page Limitations
All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed
Instructions for Application Submission
The following section supplements the instructions found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this FOA.
SF424(R&R) Cover
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
SF424(R&R) Project/Performance Site Locations
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
SF424(R&R) Other Project Information
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
SF424(R&R) Senior/Key Person Profile
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
 

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

R&R Subaward Budget
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
PHS 398 Research Plan
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:

Research Strategy: Research supported through this FOA should focus on theory-based novel, transformative approaches that leverage and aggregate existing datasets to advance our understanding of suicidal behaviors.

Significance

  • Describe the value of aggregating the identified datasets and/or probing existing large healthcare records and how it will yield insight regarding the regarding understanding of etiology, trajectories, and/or mitigation of suicide risk.
  • Justify the goals of the application in the context of the current state of the science/analysis/technology as a benchmark. Applicants should make a compelling case regarding the identified research gap and how their proposed research will advance understanding in the area of suicide.
  • Provide information regarding how the proposed data analyses inform measures of suicidal behavior in current studies and/or datasets, or inform NIMH’s RDoC efforts.
  • Provide information regarding the specific insight regarding potential novel prevention and intervention development approaches the application provides.
  • Describe how additional research avenues might germinate from the proposed projected.

Investigators

  • Without duplicating information in the biosketches, describe the Investigator team's expertise regarding: 1) integrating data sets, 2) methodology and statistical/computational approaches for analyzing integrated data sets, and 3) suicidal ideation and behaviors.

Innovation

  • Describe how the proposed research utilizes novel, transformative approaches that leverage and aggregate existing datasets, including innovation in the approaches to harmonizing and analyzing the data.

Approach

  • Detail approaches that will be used to integrate data from multiple sources and/or multiple levels. Describe strategies that will be used to harmonize data across studies/trials that used different measures to assess the same construct and/or to derive latent variables for key constructs of interest that were not directly assessed.
  • If the project has limited feasibility information, provide a rationale as to why the approach proposed is the most appropriate and likely to generate an exceptionally high impact if successful.
  • Describe analytic methods and statistical/computational approaches that will applied to understand suicide risk and/or its mitigation.
  • Provide detailed power analyses for key aims.
  • Describe the characteristics of the samples with regards to gender, race, ethnicity and children and plans for examining subgroup analyses.

For applications that involve integration of prevention and/or treatment data sets:

  • Detail plans to examine mechanisms and mediators of risk trajectories of intervention outcomes, as appropriate.
  • Address plans for examining moderators of risk and intervention response (i.e., differences across subgroups).
  • Provide detailed power analyses for key aims and other analyses (e.g., to identify moderators of response and/or explore subgroup analyses)

Timeline and Milestones: A timeline must be included as part of the Research Strategy and should include a distinct final section, entitled “Milestones”, that briefly proposes operationally-defined indicators of progress at critical junctures. The milestones should be tailored to the unique scope of the project and written concretely enough to evaluate exactly what will have been achieved during the course of the project. When multiple datasets are proposed to be aggregated, there should be a clearly documented commitment by the data owners and the informed consent documents should permit such aggregation. If the application includes leveraging healthcare data or social media data, there should be included appropriate permissions for using these data for research purposes. There should be specific proof-of-concept test(s) that indicate how the proposed approaches will be tested and validated, along with alternative strategies should an effort fail to perform as expected .

Letters of Support: When multiple datasets are proposed to be aggregated, a clearly documented commitment by the data owners must be provided in the application and documentation that the informed consent documents permit such aggregation. Likewise, if the application includes leveraging healthcare data or social media data, appropriate permissions for using these data for research purposes must 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.

The following modifications also apply:

  • All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, should address a Data Sharing Plan.
  • Where possible  (e.g., permitted by appropriate consent), harmonized data sets should be submitted to the NIMH National Data Archive and serve as a resource to the research community:

Sharing Data via the NIMH Data Archive: To advance research through widespread data sharing among researchers, investigators funded under this FOA are encouraged to share human subjects data via the NIMH Data Archive (NDA) (NOT-MH-19-033, Notice of Data Sharing Policy for the National Institute of Mental Health). Established by the NIMH, and supported by other NIH Institutes, the NDA is a secure informatics platform for scientific collaboration and data-sharing that enables the effective communication of detailed research data, results, tools, and supporting documentation.

Where possible, investigators funded under this FOA are expected to use NDA technologies to submit data in accordance with the NDA Data Sharing Terms and Conditions, incorporated by reference, which can be found at https://nda.nih.gov/contribute/sharing-regimen.html. A resource sharing plan, formulated in accordance with these NDA Data Sharing Terms and Conditions, should be included in the grant application. The NDA links data across research projects through its Global Unique Identifier (GUID) and Data Dictionary technologies. Investigators funded under this FOA should use these technologies to submit and share their research data and results at the appropriate times. The NDA Cost Estimation Tool is a customizable Excel worksheet that can be used to calculate an estimate of the resources needed to submit and share data with the NDA. This resource estimate should be submitted as part of the application budget (http://nda.nih.gov/contribute_cost_estimation.html).

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

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

Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information

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

Delayed Onset Study

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

PHS Assignment Request Form
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

Foreign Institutions

Foreign (non-U.S.) institutions must follow policies described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, and procedures for foreign institutions described throughout the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

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

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

4. Submission Dates and Times

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

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

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

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

5. Intergovernmental Review (E.O. 12372)

This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.

6. Funding Restrictions

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

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

7. Other Submission Requirements and Information

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

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

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

Important reminders:

All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential 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.

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

Section V. Application Review Information

1. Criteria

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

Overall Impact
Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).
Scored Review Criteria
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit, and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.

 

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 application theory-based? How significant is the value of aggregating the identified datasets and/or probing existing large healthcare records? Will the proposed project yield insights regarding the understanding of etiology, trajectories, and/or mitigation of suicide risk?
  • How will the proposed data analyses inform measures of suicidal behavior in current studies and/or datasets, or inform NIMH’s RDoC efforts?
  • What specific insight regarding potential prevention and intervention development approaches does the application provide?
  • Has a compelling case been made regarding the identified research gap and how the proposed research will advance understanding in the area of suicide, in the context of the current state of the science?
  • Does the application make a compelling case regarding additional research venues that might germinate from the proposed project?

 

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

  • Does the study team have the appropriate expertise regarding: 1) integrating/harmonizing data sets, 2) methodology and statistical/computational approaches for analyzing integrated data sets, and 3) suicide ideation and behaviors?

 

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?

  • Does the proposed research utilize novel, transformative approaches that leverage and aggregate existing data, including innovative approaches for harmonizing and analyzing the data?

 

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

  • Does the application describe and justify the strategies that will be used to harmonize data across studies/trials, including plans that will be used to integrate data from studies that used different measures to assess the same construct and/or to derive latent variables for key constructs of interest that were not directly assessed
  • If the project has limited feasibility information, has a sound rationale been provided as to why the approach proposed is the most appropriate and likely to generate an exceptionally high impact if successful?
  • Are analytic methods and statistical/computational approaches that will be used to better understand suicide risk and/or its mitigation appropriately described and justified?  
  • As appropriate, does the application specify plans to examine mechanisms and mediators of risk trajectories or of intervention outcomes?
  • Does the application address plans for examining moderators of risk and/or moderators of intervention response (i.e., differences across subgroups)?
  • Does the application provide detailed and convincing power analyses for key aims and other analyses (e.g., to identify moderators of risk/response and/or explore subgroup analyses)?

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

 

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?

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

Timeline and Milestones: Are these milestones tailored to the unique scope of the project and written concretely enough to evaluate exactly what will have been achieved during the course of the project? When multiple datasets are proposed to be aggregated, is there a clearly documented commitment by the data owners and do the informed consent documents permit such aggregation? If the application includes leveraging healthcare data or social media data, are the appropriate permissions for using these data for research purposes included? Are there specific proof-of-concept test(s) that indicate how the proposed approaches will be tested and validated, along with alternative strategies should an effort fail to perform as expected? Does the application consider where additional research might arise from the proposed project? Does the application specifically consider how it might inform potential future research avenues that could germinate from the proposed project?    

 

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.

 

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

 

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

 

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.

 

Not applicable.

 

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.

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

 

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.

 

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 Data Sharing Plan (GDS).

 

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

 

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

2. Review and Selection Process

Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by NIMH, 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 Mental Health Council. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
  • Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as determined by scientific peer review.
  • Availability of funds.
  • Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.

3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates

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

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

Section VI. Award Administration Information

1. Award Notices

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

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

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

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General  and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities. More information is provided at Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants.

Recipients of federal financial assistance (FFA) from HHS must administer their programs in compliance with federal civil rights law. This means that recipients of HHS funds must ensure equal access to their programs without regard to a person’s race, color, national origin, disability, age and, in some circumstances, sex and religion. This includes ensuring your programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency.  HHS recognizes that research projects are often limited in scope for many reasons that are nondiscriminatory, such as the principal investigator’s scientific interest, funding limitations, recruitment requirements, and other considerations. Thus, criteria in research protocols that target or exclude certain populations are warranted where nondiscriminatory justifications establish that such criteria are appropriate with respect to the health or safety of the subjects, the scientific study design, or the purpose of the research.

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

For additional guidance regarding how the provisions apply to NIH grant programs, please contact the Scientific/Research Contact that is identified in Section VII under Agency Contacts of this FOA. HHS provides general guidance to recipients of FFA on meeting their legal obligation to take reasonable steps to provide meaningful access to their programs by persons with limited English proficiency. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/special-topics/limited-english-proficiency/index.html. The HHS Office for Civil Rights also provides guidance on complying with civil rights laws enforced by HHS. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/section-1557/index.htmlhttps://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-providers/laws-regulations-guidance/index.html. Recipients of FFA also have specific legal obligations for serving qualified individuals with disabilities. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/disability/index.html. Please contact the HHS Office for Civil Rights for more information about obligations and prohibitions under federal civil rights laws at https://www.hhs.gov/ocr/about-us/contact-us/index.html or call 1-800-368-1019 or TDD 1-800-537-7697. Also note it is an HHS Departmental goal to ensure access to quality, culturally competent care, including long-term services and supports, for vulnerable populations. For further guidance on providing culturally and linguistically appropriate services, recipients should review the National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health and Health Care at http://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=2&lvlid=53.

Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award
Not Applicable

3. Reporting

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.
A final RPPR, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

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.

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

Section VII. Agency Contacts

We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
Application Submission Contacts
eRA Service Desk (Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, and post-submission issues)

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

General Grants Information (Questions regarding application instructions, application processes, and NIH grant resources)
Email: GrantsInfo@nih.gov (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-945-7573

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

Scientific/Research Contact(s)

Eve E. Reider, Ph.D.
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
Telephone: 301-827-1496
Email: ereider@mail.nih.gov

Peer Review Contact(s)

Nick Gaiano, Ph.D.
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
Telephone: 301-827-3420
Email: nick.gaiano@nih.gov

Financial/Grants Management Contact(s)

Tamara Kees
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
Telephone: 301-443-8811
Email: tkees@mail.nih.gov
 

Section VIII. Other Information

Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Authority and Regulations
Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Part 75.


Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices
NIH Office of Extramural Research Logo
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) - Home Page
Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
USA.gov - Government Made Easy
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health®


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