National Institutes of Health (NIH)
U24 Resource-Related Research Projects – Cooperative Agreements
The purpose of this funding opportunity announcement (FOA) is to invite applications from new and existing sites to serve as Clinical Centers (Hubs) in the SIREN Network. SIREN conducts multi-center clinical trials to improve the outcomes for patients with neurologic, cardiac, respiratory, hematologic, and traumatic conditions. For its second funding cycle the SIREN network will consist of one Clinical Coordinating Center (CCC), one Data Coordinating Center (DCC) and up to 14 clinical centers (Hubs). A Hub is usually an academic center or tertiary referral center which actively enrolls patients into all of the clinical trials performed in SIREN. Hubs also provide scientific leadership to, and administrative oversight of, their multiple satellite sites ("Spokes"). Together the Hubs and Spokes provide access to a large and varying patient population for clinical trials. SIREN performs a number of simple, pragmatic clinical trials in the emergency department and pre-hospital settings. The clinical trials are meritorious, peer–reviewed projects which are awarded under separate funding announcements.
30 days prior to application due date.
|Application Due Dates||Review and Award Cycles|
|New||Renewal / Resubmission / Revision (as allowed)||AIDS||Scientific Merit Review||Advisory Council Review||Earliest Start Date|
|January 18, 2022||January 18, 2022||Not Applicable||July 2022||May 2022||November 2022|
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.
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.
The purpose of this funding opportunity announcement (FOA) is to solicit applications from new and existing centers to serve as the SIREN clinical Hubs. First funded in 2017, SIREN provides a robust and readily accessible infrastructure for rapid implementation and high quality performance of clinical trials in a breadth of emergency indications related to neurology (for example status epilepticus, traumatic brain or spinal cord injury) cardiovascular medicine (for example cardiac arrest, decompensation of cardiac failure), respiratory conditions (for example respiratory arrest, pulmonary embolus), hematology (e.g., exsanguination) and trauma.
This network does not carry out cerebrovascular trials. These are run in the NINDS StrokeNet network.
In this second funding cycle, the network will have fourteen clinical hubs with their satellite sites (Hub and Spoke clinical site model). The SIREN infrastructure is large enough to carry out several trials simultaneously. This FOA solicits applications for these SIREN Hubs. Since the Spokes are identified, recruited and overseen by the applicant Hubs, there is no separate FOA for Spokes.
There is a clear public health imperative to stimulate and support research that improves care and clinical outcomes. In 2017, the most recent year with data published by the CDC, there were almost 139 million Emergency Department (ED) visits in the United States which included almost 40 million visits due to trauma. Of all these, 14.5 million resulted in a hospital admission. About half of the 10 most frequent reasons for presentation at an ED (i.e. chest pain, headache, cough, back symptoms, shortness of breath) are neurologic or heart, lung, blood (HLB) conditions which together make up about 16% of all ED visits.
Clinical emergency care research covers all stages of the provision of emergency care, from pre-hospital emergency medical services to hospital EDs, trauma systems and emergency operative interventions. The principles of emergency care – making accurate and timely diagnoses and interventions – are independent of the disease, organ system and venue. The ED is the common entry portal for more than half of all hospitalized patients. Although dysfunction may start in one organ system, in a critical situation other organs can become rapidly involved, so successful care must address multiple systems. These characteristics of emergency care led to the creation of SIREN as a single, adaptable network able to support clinical trials in the multiple indications of neurology, cardiology, respiratory, hematology and trauma.
SIREN harnesses multidisciplinary emergency care expertise to provide scientific leadership and the infrastructure required to conduct large, simple, pragmatic clinical trials to advance knowledge of optimal patient management in the prehospital and ED setting. In addition, the network may be called upon to include other venues where post emergency care is provided (such as critical care units, the operating room or other hospital settings) when required by the needs of peer-reviewed, meritorious clinical trials.
The Hubs contribute to these objectives by exemplary execution of clinical trials, including rapid start up and enrollment, protection of human subjects, and provision of accurate data in a timely fashion. To facilitate trial performance, the Hubs will select and provide oversight and leadership to satellite clinical sites ("Spokes").
SIREN is funded by NINDS and NHLBI, with NINDS as the lead institute. The Office of Emergency Care Research (OECR) provides additional expertise. SIREN will consist of one clinical coordinating center (CCC), one data coordinating center (DCC) and 14 clinical center Hubs with their affiliated satellite clinical sites (“Spokes”), with the capability to coordinate clinical research in a large number of EDs across the United States.
The Clinical Coordinating Center (CCC) provides scientific and organizational leadership to SIREN to achieve both efficiency and excellence in its implementation and performance of clinical trials. Responsibilities of the CCC include coordinating and managing the central Institutional Review Board (IRB) communication and submissions, master contract agreements with the clinical sites for trial performance, recruitment plans, enrollment tracking and quality improvement. The CCC is also charged with coordinating potential new trials and supporting interested investigators.
The Data Coordinating Center (DCC) provides scientific and organizational leadership to SIREN in all aspects of data management, data quality, data sharing, use of data standards (NINDS Common Data elements), statistical design and statistical analysis. Responsibilities of the DCC particularly include the tracking and managing of the safety data and preparation of data for the Data Safety Monitoring Board(s) (DSMB) reports, and reporting to regulatory authorities (e.g., central IRB, FDA). The role and responsibilities of the DCC are described in RFA-NS-22-013
The Hubs contribute scientific leadership and conduct clinical trials in the ED and pre-hospital settings (e.g., ambulance, other transport) . A Hub is a regional academic medical center or tertiary care facility which will enroll participants itself along with providing clinical and organizational leadership to its network of 2-10 satellite sites (Spokes). The Hub should be capable of providing physicians with expertise in emergency medicine, neurology, cardiology, pulmonology, hematology, general surgery, trauma surgery, neurosurgery, cardiovascular surgery or other subspecialties, as required for the execution of clinical trials. The roles and responsibilities of the Hubs and Spokes are described more fully below (see Hubs: Characteristics, Roles and Responsibilities).
The CCC, DCC, Hubs and Spokes are each integral components of the network. SIREN's continued success requires close, active cooperation and collaboration to assimilate these elements into a highly effective clinical research structure. Investigators at all levels in SIREN are strongly encouraged to promote innovative methods to improve efficiency and quality in performance of emergency care clinical research.
Initial funding for the CCC, DCC and Hubs was through three awards (RFA-NS-16-014, RFA-NS-16-015, RFA-NS-16-016). The FOAs supported cooperative agreements, under which the SIREN CCC, DCC, and Hubs were expected to achieve agreed upon milestones and metrics, as described in each of the FOAs. The baseline funding is purposefully lean, and SIREN will additionally be supported by the individual clinical trial awards. SIREN currently has three active clinical trials enrolling participants as well as a number of ancillary studies. All investigators participating in SIREN (CCC, DCC, Hubs) should stimulate and encourage the submission of clinical trial applications from the scientific community, including investigators within SIREN as well as others not affiliated with the network. Interested potential applicants are strongly encouraged to communicate with the Scientific/Research Contacts for this FOA regarding the processes and procedures for clinical trial applications at least three months prior to the planned submission date.
Clinical Trials Conducted In SIREN
With the agreement of the funding NIH Institutes, clinical trials from other NIH Institutes or federal agencies which are relevant to emergency medicine may be conducted in SIREN. SIREN currently runs clinical trials that address neurological trauma and the recovery from cardiac arrest. It also completed a trial addressing the prevention of severe COVID infection. SIREN continues to invite applications for large (>1000 participants), simple, pragmatic clinical trials in the ED and pre-hospital (e.g., emergency medical services [EMS]) setting. The terms simple and pragmatic denote clinical trials which are consistent with and can be efficiently incorporated into standard emergency care. Typical features include brief, inclusive participant eligibility criteria, procedures which integrate easily into or with standard of care practices and limited, focused data collection. Appropriate trials may test novel devices, medications or procedures or may compare effectiveness of existing therapeutic approaches. Trials in SIREN will be hypothesis driven; registries or descriptive observational studies are not suitable for the SIREN netwrok.
The clinical trials to be conducted in SIREN will be funded individually by project-specific grants from the participating NIH Institutes (e.g., NINDS and NHLBI), and other institutes or federal agencies with the agreement of the SIREN leadership. SIREN is a multidisciplinary network reflective of the spectrum of clinical challenges confronted in emergency care. SIREN is not intended to be simply a neurology network or a cardiovascular network, and will conduct, in a fair and balanced manner, clinical research relevant to neurology and to the heart, lungs and circulation.
Clinical trial applications may come from academic investigators (inside or outside of SIREN), investigators in military medical facilities, small business, industry, or other eligible institutions. SIREN may also be called upon to join or engage in other, on-going clinical trials in emergency medicine. SIREN will work collaboratively with other programs or networks, as a lead, partner, or participant, as appropriate.
Hubs: Characteristics, Roles and Responsibilities
A typical SIREN Hub is a medical center with full multidisciplinary coverage (24/7) such as 1) a level 1 trauma center or 2) a major referral neurologic or cardiovascular academic medical center or 3) a tertiary care facility. If a Hub is not itself a Level 1 trauma center, it must either be co-located with one or have a committed Spoke which is a Level 1 trauma center. A Hub is expected to be an exemplary clinical research site itself, while concurrently providing leadership, organizational oversight and research support to its Spokes.
The Hubs should participate as a clinical site in every clinical trial performed in SIREN, whether the focus is neurological, pulmonary, cardiovascular or trauma. However, specific study requirements may not be available at every Hub, in which case it cannot participate in some trials.
Each Hub must be able to:
1) execute clinical trials in the ED setting; 2) provide and coordinate the multiple medical and surgical specialties which may participate in the clinical trials, such as neurology, cardiology, pulmonary, neurosurgery, trauma surgery, cardiothoracic surgery, anesthesia and hospital intensivists; 3) demonstrate a strong working relationship with pre-hospital providers (e.g., EMS); 4) propose and oversee a network of Spokes.
The principal function of the Spokes is to provide access to a larger participant population for trial enrollment. Spokes also increase access to participants with a particular disease or injury, to participants from underserved communities, or complement the Hub by providing access to specific research or clinical expertise. Each Hub must have a flexible network of Spokes. For each clinical trial the Hub would be expected to construct a network of 2-10 Spokes specifically tailored to the needs of that particular trial. Since the requirements of each clinical trial will be somewhat different, the identity and configuration of Spokes will be unique for each clinical trial. Therefore, a Hub should have relationships with a number of potential Spokes, and the ability to add Spokes as appropriate. To demonstrate the ability to attract Spokes, the applicant is requested to identify in the grant submission five Spokes committed to participation in at least one clinical trial. Since these five Spokes are unlikely to meet all possible clinical trial requirements, the Hub should have plans and mechanisms for recruiting and adding other Spokes when needed.
The Hub and Spokes together must be able to 1) support recruitment of at least 100 participants per year into current and future concurrent trials; 2) provide physicians with expertise in cardiology, neurology, pulmonary, hematology, trauma surgery, thoracic surgery, neurosurgery, intensive care and anesthesia. Spokes may range from academic emergency centers to community hospitals, as appropriate to expand participant access and representation of minorities, rural and other underserved and underrepresented communities. The Spokes may be geographically related partnering medical centers or geographically distant centers where productive collaboration can be demonstrated in the application. Spokes should be located in North America; if outside of the United States the applicant must explain how the Spoke will coordinate with the SIREN central IRB and how they will comply with local human subjects and data sharing regulations. Spokes may enroll and treat participants on-site or may identify potential participants to transfer to the Hub for enrollment. There is no ideal or preferred arrangement.
Active participation of the prehospital providers is also critical to achieving the recruitment of at least 100 research participants per year into the concurrent trials. The configuration of providers is highly variable; the catchment area of the Hub ED might be served by one or several providers. As with Spokes, there is no a priori preferred arrangement; the applicant should propose the optimal configuration for their situation.
The design and requirements will be unique for each funded clinical trial, therefore SIREN is designed to be flexible. Hub applications should demonstrate resourcefulness and innovation in approaching the challenges of each study.
In addition, note that:
Milestones will be determined at the time of the award. Failure to meet the agreed upon milestones may result in reduced funding or early termination of the cooperative agreement (see Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award).
The responsibilities of the SIREN Hub include but are not limited to:
a) Master Contracts and Payments are used to speed implementation of clinical trials in SIREN. The CCC has negotiated and maintains a master contract with each Hub and each Spoke. Payments will be on a per-patient basis, according to clinical trial budgets and the master trial agreement and will be directly distributed by the CCC to each Hub and Spoke. All clinical centers, both Hubs and Spokes, are expected to work cooperatively with the CCC and to accept the master contract and payment system. Applicants are encouraged to consult with their institutions regarding acceptability of master contracts.
b) Central Institutional Review Board (IRB). The CCC has appointed a central IRB for SIREN and has created reliance agreements with each Hub and Spoke (unless the Spoke uses the Hub’s IRB). Applicants who do not agree to use central IRB cannot be considered for funding.
Some of the clinical trials conducted within SIREN require Exception from Informed Consent (EFIC) with requirements for community consultation, opt-out options and public disclosure (see Exception from Informed Consent Requirements for Emergency Research, FDA, 2013 and 21 CFR 50.24 ). It is expected that clinical centers will use the central IRB for EFIC studies, though fulfillment of community based requirements may entail collaboration with local IRBs, local community liaisons, local community representatives or other means. Applicants are strongly encouraged to consult with their institution including their institutional IRB, regarding: 1) acceptability of a central IRB for emergency care clinical trials that are not EFIC, 2) acceptable approaches to EFIC trials under a central IRB. Applicants must accept a central IRB to be considered for this application.
Any clinical trials supported by DoD funds are reviewed and approved by the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command Office of Research Protections, Human Research Protection Office of Research Protections, Human Research Protection Office to ensure DoD-specific regulations, including 10 USC 980 and DoDI 3216.02, are appropriately addressed. Additional information about these requirements is located at (https://mrmc.amedd.army.mil/index.cfm?pageid=Research_Protections.hrpo). Applicants are strongly encouraged to consult with their institution, potentially including their institutional IRB, regarding institutional compliance with DoD specific human subjects protections.
c) Participant Enrollment The Hub is responsible, in cooperation with the CCC, for creating and executing clinical trial-specific participant recruitment plans for itself and its Spokes. Achievement of recruitment goals for diverse and underserved populations (i.e., ethnic groups, racial groups, gender, rural populations) is particularly important. If recruitment is not meeting expectation, the Hub, in cooperation with the CCC and clinical trial PD/PI, must create and execute a corrective action plan(s).
d) Quality AssuranceThe Hub is responsible for quality control and improvement for itself and its group of Spokes and prehospital providers. The CCC has broader responsibility for creation and monitoring of specific, quantifiable performance metrics for SIREN, which will likely include start-up time, patient recruitment and retention, time from last patient last visit to data base lock, and number and aging of data queries. Quality reviews will be performed at least annually. Hubs and Spokes are expected to cooperate with the CCC in quality reviews and are further encouraged to propose innovative approaches to quality assessment and improvement.
e) Clinical Trial Grant Submissions The scientific value of SIREN is realized through clinical trials conducted in the network. Additionally, clinical trial grants provided significant contributions to financial support of the infrastructure (i.e. CCC, DCC and Hubs) during Years 2 - 5 of SIREN. Therefore, it is important that Hub research personnel encourage and support submission of high quality, impactful clinical trial grant applications from colleagues at their institution or elsewhere within the emergency medicine community. Hubs PDs/PIs and team members are also encouraged to initiate or contribute to clinical trial applications themselves.
f) SIREN Governance Committees. The Hub PD/PI or designee is expected to actively participate on the SIREN Steering Committee (SSC) and to serve on a rotating basis on the SIREN Management Committee and SIREN Operations Committee. The governance committees and anticipated meeting frequency are described at the end of this section.
g) Involvement of junior faculty. Consistent with the NIH priority to foster the next generation of clinical investigators, each Hub should budget no less than $50,000 per year for the participation of junior faculty in the research activities of the network. These funds may be used to support one or more SIREN junior faculty. The length of the participation, the number of junior faculty supported and their roles in the work of the network will be determined by each Hub. There is no single model to be followed so long as the program is justified in the Hub application, however Hub leadership are encouraged to involve junior faculty in network activities that will contribute to their development as clinical investigators.
h) Commitment to diversity and inclusive excellence. The research enterprise will be strongest when it involves individuals from a wide variety of backgrounds, who have a wide variety of perspectives. Consistent with the NIH Commitment to Diversity applicants should demonstrate inclusive excellence (at the faculty, department, and institution level).
SIREN Governance Committees
The success of SIREN requires collaboration and cooperation among its component parts and members. Therefore, participation in the SIREN governance committees is an important responsibility. The current structure is provided as a guide for applicants to use in composing the research plan and budget of their application.
The SIREN Steering Committee (SSC) is the main governing body. The responsibilities of the SSC include: 1) provide scientific leadership in SIREN; 2) promote awareness of SIREN throughout the emergency community; 3) encourage and support development of clinical trial concepts and proposals for SIREN; 4) systematically assess clinical needs and goals for emergency care research. Membership and meeting frequency are outlined in the table entitled "SIREN Governance Committees". SSC meetings may include other ad hoc participants, such as research team members from the CCC, DCC, Hubs, Spokes, or clinical trials.
The SSC has established several working groups or subcommittees. These include: 1) Support of CCC or DCC functions (e.g., developing per-patient budgets; assuring quality control; monitoring conflicts of interest; developing and standardizing per-patient budgets); 2) Development of core competencies and technologies (e.g., imaging, ECG data analysis); 3) Subject area working groups (e.g., neurology, cardiac, pulmonary, trauma) with attention to encouraging and developing clinical trial grants; 4) Working groups for allied health professionals (e.g., EMS, study coordinators); 5) Advisory committees (e.g., patients and advocates, external experts); 6) Special topics ( publication plans, finance, training/education materials).
The SIREN Management Committee (SMC) and the SIREN Operations Committee (SOC) oversee the day to day administration and operations of SIREN. The first is more oriented towards strategic and administrative functions, the second towards operational and executional functions. In addition, each clinical trial will have a Trial Committee, responsible for conduct of that particular trial.
Table: SIREN Governance Committees
SIREN Steering Committee
CCC PD/PI (chair), DCC PD/PI, PD/PI or designee from each Hub
SIREN Operations Committee
CCC PD/PI (chair), DCC PD/PI, selected CCC and/or DCC research team members, selected Hub PIs*
Weekly or biweekly by phone or webinar
Clinical trial PD/PI (chair), CCC and DCC research team members (one of which should be either the CCC PD/PI or DCC PD/PI)
Monthly by phone or webinar, adjusted by activity and needs of trial
* Hub PD/PIs or designees will serve on a rotating basis, with attention to balance across specialties (e.g., neurology, cardiology)
Federal oversight is provided by the SIREN Federal Committee, which will consist of representatives from the the two participating institutions funding the SIREN program along with expert consultation from the Office of Emergency Clinical Research (OECR). NINDS is the lead institute for grants and funding for the SIREN infrastructure of CCC, DCC, and clinical Hubs. Each of the institutions on the SIREN Federal Committee also provides membership to participate on SIREN committees as needed.
Independent of the governance above, the NIH Directors retain oversight for all funded research from individual institutes or programs. The Directors’ authority overrides all other committee decisions.
See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.
Cooperative Agreement: A support mechanism used when there will be substantial Federal scientific or programmatic involvement. Substantial involvement means that, after award, NIH scientific or program staff will assist, guide, coordinate, or participate in project activities. See Section VI.2 for additional information about the substantial involvement for this FOA.
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.
Not Allowed: Only accepting applications that do not propose clinical trials.
The number of awards is contingent upon NIH appropriations and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
The following NIH components intend to fund up to 14 awards which will be administered by NINDS and commit the following amounts to direct costs in FY 2022:
Application budgets should not exceed a maximum of $250,000 in direct costs per year. .
The maximum requested project period cannot exceed 5 years but the actual funded project period is dependent on reaching specific performance milestones (see Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award).
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made from this FOA.
1. Eligible Applicants
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 not eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed.
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.
Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))
All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account. PD(s)/PI(s) should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate their existing account with the applicant organization in eRA Commons. If the PD/PI is also the organizational Signing Official, they must have two distinct eRA Commons accounts, one for each role. Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.
Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with his/her organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for NIH support.
For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
It is preferable that only 1-2 PD/PIs be identified on each Hub application.
2. Cost Sharing
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.
The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time, per 188.8.131.52 Submission of Resubmission Application. This means that the NIH will not accept:
Only one Hub application per institution (normally identified by having a unique DUNS number or NIH IPF number) is allowed. A Hub application will be from a single institution, which may include geographically or organizationally linked partners or sites (e.g., multiple hospitals within an academic institution and/or affiliations of private and community hospitals), though this is not required.
Awards for a Hub and a CCC may be made to the same institution. There should be different investigators leading the Hub and the CCC to ensure that each activity receives full attention.
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 SubmissionIt is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide except where instructed in this funding opportunity announcement to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
Letter of Intent
Although a letter of intent is 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:
Jeremy Brown MD
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.
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.
The PD/PI for the Hub will be a clinical trials expert with a track record of successfully implementing clinical trials. As support, applicants should provide evidence to demonstrate experience in:
Applicants are strongly encouraged to name an experienced research team. The applicants are encouraged to assemble a diverse team that includes women and underrepresented minorities. The applicants are also encouraged to include young investigators or junior faculty, if appropriate. Members of the research team are determined by the applicant, but often may include:
If the applicant or other Key/Senior Personnel have successfully been awarded a clinical trial grant or have served as a PD/PI on a clinical trial in the past, this should be included in the biographical sketch.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
The following items are NOT allowed in the budget requests:
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: The Research Strategy must consist of the following Sections A – F. Information should be presented in a manner which clearly delineates experience and capabilitiesfor the Hub itself and the Hub with its proposed Spoke network.
A. Background and Experience
The applicant should include a description of current and up to 10 recently completed multicenter clinical trials involving the clinical site. The most informative and relevant examples would be clinical trials involving emergency medicine and/or performed in the ED or prehospital setting. Trials involving neurology, cardiology, respiratory, hematology, or trauma are also relevant. EFIC studies, particularly ones performed in the ED and/or pre-hospital setting, are highly relevant. The summary may however include clinical trials on any disease from any funding source, if judged informative by the applicant.
If the applicant is an existing SIREN Hub site, include metrics for each of these SIREN trials: HOBIT, BOOST-3, ICECAP and C3PO. SIREN ancillary trials should also be included.
The following metrics should be presented in tabular form for each clinical trial, as shown below.
|Trial Name||Funding Source||Number of active spokes||As of Sept 1, 2021||Days from cIRB approval to site-release-to-enroll||Days from site-release-to-enroll to first enrollment||Participants lost-to-follow-up,||Participants with eligibility deviations, N (%)||Data accuracy – case report forms requiring data correction, %||Data timeliness:|
|Total enrollment at Hub and affiliated Spokes||Total study enrollment (from all SIREN clinical sites)||median (IQR)||median (IQR)||N (%)||On-time case report form submission, %|
*retention defined as enrolled participants that did not withdraw consent or were not lost to follow up
The role of the Hub and proposed research team should be clear. Published manuscripts that highlight recently coordinated trials should be referenced in the application in the Bibliography and References Cited section of the application.
Demonstration of leadership capability is required for the Hub PI(s), and should cover the specific points outlined in the Senior/Key Person Profile. It is also expected that, in order to successfully lead a group of Spokes and pre-hospital providers, the PI already plays a leadership role in some capacity to the emergency medicine community or local medical community, which should also be described in the application.
Progress (Renewal Applications only). Include a progress report describing the group’s accomplishments relative to participation in SIREN over the current funding period. To do this,
1) list the progress and achievements specific to the application since the previous competitive review
2) summarize the Hubs efficiency in starting new trials (time to first patient enrolled, time to complete Exception from Informed Consent (EFIC) site work, etc.)
3) summarize efficiency of enrollment at their Hub in the ongoing or completed SIREN trials
4) describe the timeliness and accuracy of data entry into the DCC web data system
5) describe team contributions of the site PI leadership, participation in network activities, attendance at meetings, etc., and
6) describe how the presence of the SIREN Hub award has facilitated performance in the SIREN clinical trials.
Relevant Accomplishments (New Applications only). Describe the group’s accomplishments relative to implementing clinical trials in the group’s practice setting(s) and provide a detailed summary of the group’s accrual to these trials. Describe the group’s contributions to the research agenda of its affiliated cooperative groups during the past 3 years (if any). This should include efficiency of starting these trials (e.g., IRB submission, approval, time to first enrollment, EFIC, etc.), the timeliness and accuracy of data entry to the trial, and efficiency of enrollment. If they are currently enrolling in one of the SIREN trials as a non-SIREN site, they should include performance metrics for that trial in the application. Data performance metrics should be presented in tabular form as described above.
C. The Hub Network
D. Organization and Operations
E. Involvement of Junior Faculty
Plans for involving junior faculty in the research activities of the network should be detailed, along with the name and qualifications of the person who will be directly responsible for this aspect of the Hub’s activities. The application should include a description of how the junior faculty will be selected, what the expectations are of them, and a detailed budget for this activity.
F. Quality Assurance
Letters of Support
A statement of commitment from each participating institution or organization must be provided. In addition, an institutional letter of support from the applicant's departmental and/or institutional leadership must be included in the application. It should address how the institutional commitment will be established and sustained, how the institution will maintain accountability for promoting scientific excellence, and how the SIREN effort will be given a high priority within the institution (relative to other research efforts and non-NIH supported programs.)
The institutional commitment may be in the form of support for recruitment of scientific talent, provision of discretionary resources to the network site director, assignment of specialized research space, cost sharing of resources, and/or other ways proposed by the applicant institution. Letters from a high-level institution official(s) (e.g., Dean of the School of Medicine, Hospital President, and Vice President for Research) should be included confirming this commitment.
The letters of support should provide evidence of willingness to accept SIREN procedures specifically including: 1) standardized master trial agreements; 2) per-patient payments: 3) centralized trial budgeting; 4) using a central IRB. It should also demonstrate a willingness to work with a central IRB on EFIC clinical trials
A statement of commitment to participate in SIREN should be provided from at least five Spoke sites, and from at least one pre-hospital provider (e.g., EMS). In settings where multiple pre-hospital providers serve the Hub and committed Spokes, letters from more than one provider would be appropriate. These letters should include description of particular resources to be committed, relevant prior experience, planned organizational and/or administrative structure in conjunction with the Hub, and willingness to participate collaboratively in the broader SIREN structure (e.g., central IRB, master contracts). The letter from the prehospital provider should also include willingness of the medical director to support research and willingness of the provider to make time available for training.
For those institutions with a Clinical Translational Science Award (CTSA), the applicants are encouraged to include documentation from the CTSA principal investigator regarding any support which will be provided to the Hub. This may include access to or assistance from Recruitment (RIC) and Trial (TIC) liaisons at the CTSA.
Additional letters of support may be included from key personnel, such as disease experts and physician subspecialists.
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:
Data Submission and Sharing Policies for the Federal Interagency Traumatic Brain Injury Research (FITBIR) Informatics System Data from Traumatic Brain Injury clinical research studies must be submitted if they meet they meet the following criteria: (1) TBI-related clinical trials; (2) all unsolicited clinical TBI research grants with a budget greater than or equal to $500,000/year in direct costs; (3) ancillary studies, regardless of budget, to either TBI-related clinical trials or clinical TBI research grants with budgets greater than or equal to $500,000/year in direct costs; and (4) clinical TBI research grants awarded under funding opportunity announcements (FOAs) with specific requirements for FITBIR data submission. In addition, any TBI genomic studies that generate large-scale genomic data, regardless of the size of the budget, or NIH grant funding mechanism, should follow the guidance of the NIH GDS Policy on data sharing. For more information read the Notice of Modification of the Data Submission and Sharing Policies for the Federal Interagency Traumatic Brain Injury Research (FITBIR) Informatics System https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-NS-17-029.html
Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Study Population Characteristics
Recruitment and Retention Plan
Applicants must include a discussion of the ability of sites to recruit and retain the proposed number of participants, including women, underrepresented minorities, and individuals across the lifespan. Evidence should be provided that relevant stakeholders (e.g., potential participants, referring and treating physicians, diverse patient groups) have equipoise, view the question to be important and consider the study acceptable.
PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials (and when applicable, clinical trials research experience) follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered “Yes” to the question “Are Human Subjects Involved?” on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or Delayed Onset Study record.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Delayed Onset Study
Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start).All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
PHS Assignment Request Form
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
3. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)
See Part 1. Section III.1 for information regarding the requirement for obtaining a unique entity identifier and for completing and maintaining active registrations in System for Award Management (SAM), NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code (if applicable), eRA Commons, and Grants.gov
4. Submission Dates and Times
Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission. When a submission date falls on a weekend or Federal holiday, the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day.
Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies). Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH’s electronic system for grants administration. NIH and Grants.gov systems check the application against many of the application instructions upon submission. Errors must be corrected and a changed/corrected application must be submitted to Grants.gov on or before the application due date and time. If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late. Applications that miss the due date and time are subjected to the NIH Policy on Late Application Submission.
Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.
Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
5. Intergovernmental Review (E.O. 12372)
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
6. Funding Restrictions
All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
7. Other Submission Requirements and Information
Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.
Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.
For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit How to Apply – Application Guide. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Dealing with System Issues guidance. For assistance with application submission, contact the Application Submission Contacts in Section VII.
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.
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.
Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit, and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project rigorous? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
Does the proposed Hub address the needs of the research network that it will serve? Is the scope of activities proposed for the Hub appropriate to meet those needs? Will successful completion of the aims bring unique advantages or capabilities to the research network?
How will the proposed Hub contribute to the advancement of clinical research and clinical trials within the framework of SIREN?
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?
Are the PD(s)/PI(s) and other personnel well suited to their roles in the Hub? Do they have appropriate experience and training, and have they demonstrated experience and an ongoing record of accomplishments in managing clinical research? Do the investigators demonstrate significant experience with coordinating collaborative clinical research? If the Center is multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise and skills; are their leadership approach, governance, plans for conflict resolution, and organizational structure appropriate for a SIREN clinical hub? Does the applicant have experience overseeing selection and management of subawards, if needed?
Which components of the PD/PI's experience prepare him/her for performing clinical trials in each of the disease areas included in SIREN (i.e., neurology, cardiovascular, respiratory, hematology, and trauma)? How do the PD/PI's past experiences prepare him/her for establishing and/or leading a network of affiliated clinical sites?
Does the application provide evidence for participation and interest from both ED physicians and disease experts (e.g., neurologists, cardiologists, pulmonologists, trauma surgeons, thoracic surgeons, neurosurgeons)?
Does the application indicate that the PD/PI has prior or existing leadership roles in the emergency medicine community and/or local medical community which will contribute to the success of SIREN?
Does the application include an investigator with an appropriate background to direct the SIREN junior faculty?
In what ways does the application suggest that the PD/PI can contribute substantially to the SIREN governance committees (e.g., SIREN Steering Committee and subcommittees, SIREN Management committee, SIREN Operations committee)? Does the application demonstrate that the PD/PI will have time to attend the meetings and teleconferences?
Is there evidence to suggest that the applicant will be effective and successful in promoting and encouraging submission of meritorious clinical trial grants for SIREN? Is there evidence to suggest that the PI or other members of the Hub/Spokes research team might initiate or contribute to a clinical trial concept or proposal?
In what way does the PD/PI's experience prepare him/her for leading and working in highly collaborative settings?
Is there assurance that the proposed research team and administrative personnel are qualified, capable and experienced? In what ways will they increase the likelihood that performance will be exemplary at the proposed Hub and Spokes?
Does the application demonstrate a commitment to diversity and inclusion among its staff and junior faculty?
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 application propose novel organizational concepts or management strategies that would increase efficiency and/or quality of clinical trial conduct at the Hub and/or its affiliated Spokes and pre-hospital providers? Are the concepts and strategies novel to one type of research program or applicable in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of organizational concepts and management strategies proposed?
Does the application provide evidence to suggest that the PD/PI, through participation in SIREN governance committees, could provide innovative ideas to increase efficiency and/or quality of clinical trial conduct throughout SIREN?
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have the investigators included plans to address weaknesses in the rigor of prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?
If the project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, are the plans to address 1) the protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults), justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
Are the overall strategy, operational plan, and organizational structure well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the goals of the research program the Hub will serve? Will the investigators promote strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased scientific approach across the program, as appropriate for the work proposed? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the network is in the early stages of operation, does the proposed strategy adequately establish feasibility and manage the risks associated with the activities of the network? Are an appropriate plan for work-flow and a well-established timeline proposed? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to ensure consideration of relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies of vertebrate animals or human subjects?
Does the hub and its spokes have the characteristics appropriate for the work proposed?
If the project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, are the plans to address 1) the protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion of children, justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
To what extent do data in the requested table and elsewhere in the application (e.g., prior clinical trial performance; catchment area) support the ability of this Hub/Spoke/ prehospital provider group to achieve the required minimum enrollment of 100 subjects per trial each year? To contribute to enrollment goals for minorities, gender, or other underserved groups (e.g., rural patients)? Does this application lend assurance that the proposed Hub/Spoke group will be able to contribute successfully to clinical trials in the planned range of disorders and diseases (i.e. neurology, cardiovascular, pulmonary, trauma)?
Does the application provide evidence that the pre-hospital Investigators and environment will be fully integrated in the organization? To what extent does the application indicate awareness of and suggest solutions to particular challenges of including prehospital providers and personnel in clinical trials?
In what ways does the application lend assurance that the applicant can tailor Spokes and prehospital providers to the needs of each trial, which include (1) execute clinical trials in the ED setting; 2) provide and coordinate the multiple medical and surgical specialties which may participate in the clinical trials; 3) demonstrate a strong working relationship with pre-hospital providers; 4) propose and oversee a network of Spokes. (see examples above in "Hubs: Characteristics, Roles and Responsibilities")? In what ways does the organization plan promote communication and collaboration: 1) among research personnel at the Hub; 2) with disease experts; 3) between the Hub and Spokes: 4) with pre-hospital providers?
Does the application support that the operational procedures and quality assurance program will lead to exemplary clinical trial execution? To what extent does the evidence in the application demonstrate that the Hub and committed Spokes can and will consistently deliver high quality clinical trial performance? Were findings from prior audits (if any) appropriately resolved?
Does the application provide evidence that the proposed Hub (PD/PI, research team) will encourage, promote, stimulate and/or contribute to submission of meritorious clinical trial grants to SIREN?
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?
Will the institutional environment in which the hub will operate contribute to the probability of success in facilitating the research network it serves? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the hub proposed? Will the hub benefit from unique features of the institutional environment, infrastructure, or personnel? Are resources available within the scientific environment to support electronic information handling?
How will the Hub support the involvement of ?
Does the institution(s) provide evidence of willingness to accept SIREN procedures specifically including: 1) standardized master trial agreements; 2) per-patient payments: 3) centralized trial budgeting; 4) central IRB? To what extent does the institution appear willing to work with a central IRB on EFIC clinical trials?
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give separate scores for these items.
For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.
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.
Recruitment and Retention Plan
Applications must include a discussion of the ability of sites to recruit and retain the proposed number of participants, including women, underrepresented minorities, and individuals across the lifespan. Evidence should be provided that relevant stakeholders (e.g., potential participants, referring and treating physicians, diverse patient groups) have equipoise, view the question to be important and consider the study acceptable.
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.
For Renewals, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.
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 NINDS, in accordance with NIH peer review policy and procedures, using the stated review criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA Commons.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications will receive a written critique.
Applications may undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit (generally the top half of applications under review) will be discussed and assigned an overall impact score.
Appeals of initial peer review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this FOA.
Applications will be assigned to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this FOA. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the National Advisory Neurological Disorders and Stroke Council (NANDSC). The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
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.
1. Award Notices
If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via email to the recipient's business official.
Recipients must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.6. Funding Restrictions. Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs.
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: Recipient 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 recipient 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, Recipients, and Activities, including of note, but not limited to:
If a recipient is successful and receives a Notice of Award, in accepting the award, the recipient agrees that any activities under the award are subject to all provisions currently in effect or implemented during the period of the award, other Department regulations and policies in effect at the time of the award, and applicable statutory provisions.
Recipients of federal financial assistance (FFA) from HHS must administer their programs in compliance with federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, age and, in some circumstances, religion, conscience, and sex. This includes ensuring programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency. The HHS Office for Civil Rights provides guidance on complying with civil rights laws enforced by HHS. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-providers/provider-obligations/index.html and http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/understanding/section1557/index.html.
HHS recognizes that research projects are often limited in scope for many reasons that are nondiscriminatory, such as the principal investigator’s scientific interest, funding limitations, recruitment requirements, and other considerations. Thus, criteria in research protocols that target or exclude certain populations are warranted where nondiscriminatory justifications establish that such criteria are appropriate with respect to the health or safety of the subjects, the scientific study design, or the purpose of the research. For additional guidance regarding how the provisions apply to NIH grant programs, please contact the Scientific/Research Contact that is identified in Section VII under Agency Contacts of this FOA.
Please contact the HHS Office for Civil Rights for more information about obligations and prohibitions under federal civil rights laws at https://www.hhs.gov/ocr/about-us/contact-us/index.html or call 1-800-368-1019 or TDD 1-800-537-7697.
In accordance with the statutory provisions contained in Section 872 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), NIH awards will be subject to the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) requirements. FAPIIS requires Federal award making officials to review and consider information about an applicant in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS) prior to making an award. An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through FAPIIS and comment on any information about itself that a Federal agency previously entered and is currently in FAPIIS. The Federal awarding agency will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to other information in FAPIIS, in making a judgement about the applicant’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 45 CFR Part 75.205 and 2 CFR Part 200.206 “Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants.” This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.
The following special terms of award are in addition to, and not in lieu of, otherwise applicable U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) administrative guidelines, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) grant administration regulations at 45 CFR Part 75 , and other HHS, PHS, and NIH grant administration policies.
The administrative and funding instrument used for this program will be the cooperative agreement, an "assistance" mechanism (rather than an "acquisition" mechanism), in which substantial NIH programmatic involvement with the recipientsis anticipated during the performance of the activities. Under the cooperative agreement, the NIH purpose is to support and stimulate the recipients' activities by involvement in and otherwise working jointly with the award recipients in a partnership role; it is not to assume direction, prime responsibility, or a dominant role in the activities. Consistent with this concept, the dominant role and prime responsibility resides with the recipientsfor the project as a whole, although specific tasks and activities may be shared among the awardees and the NIH as defined below.
The PD(s)/PI(s) will have the primary responsibility for:
NIH staff has substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below:
The Project Scientist will have no role in the decision making processes related to funding or milestones and will not participate in the review of these applications.
Areas of Joint Responsibility include:
Terms and Conditions of Award
The release of funds will be milestone-driven. Milestones will be determined jointly by the awardee, NINDS and the SIREN Federal Committee after the grant has been awarded and will be specified in the Notice of Award. The following are illustrative potential milestones for the first year of the award:
When clinical trials are being conducted in SIREN, milestones will be reflective of enrollment and timely provision of high quality trial data.
The Hubs must achieve their agreed milestones during the first year in order to be eligible for future years of funding. Hubs that do not meet agreed milestones for any year of the grant term may be terminated, if necessary. In addition, awards may be restricted at sites unable to successfully participate in SIREN clinical trials (e.g., inadequate patient enrollment, unacceptable ratings on quality metrics) or unsupportive of broader SIREN functions (e.g., failure to participate in governance, failure to promote clinical trial grant submissions).
Any disagreements that may arise in scientific or programmatic matters (within the scope of the award) between award recipients and the NIH may be brought to Dispute Resolution. A Dispute Resolution Panel composed of three members will be convened. It will have three members: a designee of the Steering Committee chosen without NIH staff voting, one NIH designee, and a third designee with expertise in the relevant area who is chosen by the other two; in the case of individual disagreement, the first member may be chosen by the individual awardee. This special dispute resolution procedure does not alter the awardee's right to appeal an adverse action that is otherwise appealable in accordance with PHS regulation 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D and DHHS regulation 45 CFR Part 16.
When multiple years are involved, recipients will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
A final RPPR, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. NIH FOAs outline intended research goals and objectives. Post award, NIH will review and measure performance based on the details and outcomes that are shared within the RPPR, as described at 45 CFR Part 75.301 and 2 CFR Part 200.301.
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Transparency Act), includes a requirement for recipients of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later. All recipients of applicable NIH grants and cooperative agreements are required to report to the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at www.fsrs.gov on all subawards over the threshold. 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 2 CFR Part 200.113 and Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75 and 2 CFR Part 200, recipients that have currently active Federal grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from all Federal awarding agencies with a cumulative total value greater than $10,000,000 for any period of time during the period of performance of a Federal award, must report and maintain the currency of information reported in the System for Award Management (SAM) about civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings in connection with the award or performance of a Federal award that reached final disposition within the most recent five-year period. The recipient must also make semiannual disclosures regarding such proceedings. Proceedings information will be made publicly available in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS). This is a statutory requirement under section 872 of Public Law 110-417, as amended (41 U.S.C. 2313). As required by section 3010 of Public Law 111-212, all information posted in the designated integrity and performance system on or after April 15, 2011, except past performance reviews required for Federal procurement contracts, will be publicly available. Full reporting requirements and procedures are found in Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75 and 2 CFR Part 200 – Award Term and Condition for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
eRA Service Desk (Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, and post-submission issues)
Finding Help Online: 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)
Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Jeremy Brown MD
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS)
George Sopko, MD
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)
National Heart, Lung, And Blood Institute (NHLBI)
Chief, Scientific Review Branch
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS)
Chief Grants Management Officer
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS)
Lynn M Rundhaugen
National Heart, Lung, And Blood Institute (NHLBI)
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 Part 75 and 2 CFR Part 200.
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.