It is critical that applicants follow the Training (T) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise in this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. Conformance to all requirements, both in the Application Guide and the FOA, is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions. Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.

Part 1. Overview Information
Part 2. Full Text of the Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
Section II. Award Information
Section III. Eligibility Information
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
Section V. Application Review Information
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Section VII. Agency Contacts
Section VIII. Other Information

Awards are made under the authorization of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, Section 20(a) and 21(a) (29 USC 669(a) and 29 USC 670); Federal Mine Safety and Health Act, Section 501(a), 30 USC 951(a).

Work-related injuries and illnesses have a significant public health impact, and part of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)'s mission is to train the next generation of occupational safety and health (OSH) practitioners and researchers. The National Assessment of the Occupational Safety and Health Workforce documents a significant shortfall in the supply of trained OSH professionals to meet current and future demand in the United States. The report provides evidence of the continued need to support OSH training and education in the core and allied OSH disciplines.

The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 mandates that NIOSH provide an adequate supply of qualified personnel to carry out the purposes of the Occupational Safety and Health Act. NIOSH Training Project Grants (TPGs) have a key role in helping meet this mandate and contribute to the Institute s core mission of providing national and world leadership to prevent workplace illnesses and injuries.

The purpose of this program is to support NIOSH TPGs, to address the burden of OSH in the United States by providing state-of-the-art training for the next generation of leaders in OSH practice and research. Recent work by Felknor, et al (2020) speaks to the 'rapid and profound changes in the future of work that will have significant implication for the education and training of OSH professionals and the workforce'. NIOSH's network of TPGs is critical in developing OSH professionals prepared to respond to the changing nature of work. These changes are the inevitable result of technological advances, globalization, new and emerging risks, climate change, and occupational health disparities associated with the changing demographics of the US workforce.

TPGs provide well-trained graduates to meet the demand for a professional OSH workforce for federal, state, and local government agencies, not-for-profit agencies, industry, agriculture, business, healthcare, worker advocacy groups, and labor organizations. TPGs help meet our nation’s need for skilled, knowledgeable practitioners and researchers in OSH and enhance diversity and inclusion in the OSH workforce.

The majority of TPGs are in academic institutions across the country and provide undergraduate, graduate, and post-graduate training in core and allied disciplines of OSH. Some TPGs are in non-academic settings meeting specific OSH training needs of a targeted audience. Through high-quality and rigorous training programs, TPGs improve the health, safety, and well-being of our nation’s workforce.

Needs Assessment. TPGs must document that their proposed training program meet specific regional or national workforce needs and demands. Tools such as surveys of employers, alumni, and other stakeholders in safety and health may be used to document this need. Applicants are requested to consider the supply and demand findings in the National Assessment of the Occupational Safety and Health Workforce). Evidence of meeting needs for an academic training program should include a discussion of how the proposed program(s) will assist their graduates with successful placement in positions as practitioners or researchers in OSH soon after graduation. Non-academic training programs should indicate specific training needs of targeted populations.

Regional Presence. TPGs should demonstrate collaborative efforts by working with a diverse and broad range of organizations to enhance OSH training in their region. Collaboration with other institutions should be considered, including Minority Serving Institutions, businesses, federal, state, or local public health and regulatory agencies, and labor and professional associations. Applicants must describe partnerships and collaboration with NIOSH supported training grants (TPGs and ERCs) in their HHS Federal Region.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. In June 2019, NIOSH began an initiative designed to help NIOSH take substantive action to create greater diversity, equity, and inclusion in its workforce, the workplace and in its service to the public. This initiative led to the establishment an institute-wide strategic plan and to the establishment of the Diversity and inclusion Office (DIO) at NIOSH under the Office of the Director. This strategic plan is intended to guide actions that specifically address diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in it all aspects of NIOSH, including NIOSH's extramural programs. TPGs should demonstrate a commitment to DEI in all aspects of their training program and be reflected in the TPG's core values, mission, and outputs, including addressing occupational health disparities, student and faculty diversity, training materials, curriculum, research training, and outreach.

Advisory Committee. TPGs must have an Advisory Committee of three or more individuals who can provide guidance and advice to the program’s leadership. The Advisory Committee may include representatives of labor, industry, business, government agencies, academic institutions, and professional associations. The Advisory Committee should meet at least annually and advise the TPG leadership on setting and reaching goals and ensuring that the TPG is progressive and is meeting local, regional, or national workforce needs.

Evaluation Plan. The application must describe an evaluation plan to capture the impact and effectiveness of the program. This may include plans to obtain feedback from trainees, graduates, employers, Advisory Committee members and other stakeholders to identify strengths and weaknesses in the program and steps for continued improvement. For academic programs, trainees' career placements, advancements, professional certifications earned, and outputs should be considered. Outputs are immediate products or direct result of research activities and include publications, reports, presentations/posters and training and educational materials.

Essential Characteristics for an Academic Training Program. NIOSH will support high quality academic training programs and academic certificate programs in core OSH disciplines of Industrial Hygiene (IH), Occupational Health Nursing (OHN), Occupational Medicine Residency (OMR), and Occupational Safety (OS) and in allied disciplines. Applicants are encouraged to take advantage of the unique strengths and capabilities of their faculty and institutions, and to develop new and innovative academic programs in core and allied disciplines that are relevant to worker health and safety. Allied disciplines include, but are not limited to occupational ergonomics, occupational epidemiology, occupational health psychology, environmental and occupational health.

Academic training programs should have a strong history of attracting highly qualified and highly motivated trainees and of maintaining a critical mass of students for a viable, sustainable program. Academic programs should have faculty with a history of public health practice or independent research support.

Each academic program should provide trainees with core competencies to be successful in their field of study, including critical thinking, effective leadership, and strong communication skills. Clinical rotations, field experiences and internships across sectors and settings are encouraged, to provide trainees with a broad understanding of the working environment.

A TPG may provide training in up to 3 core or allied OSH academic programs as resources allow. Applicants are encouraged to consider the discipline-specific competency recommendations in the National Assessment of the Occupational Safety and Health Workforce [2011].

OMR programs must be fully accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME). NIOSH funding may be used to support OMR training in the following pathways, as described by the American Board of Preventive Medicine under Certification Requirements: Residency Pathway, Complementary Pathway and Special Pathway. Physicians in the Complementary and Special Pathways are eligible for NIOSH support to encourage more qualified physicians to enter the field of occupational medicine. The Complementary and Special Pathways must be administered by an OMR Program accredited by ACGME.

Accreditation of other training programs is not required but is strongly encouraged if appropriate to the field (for example, ABET accreditation for engineering and industrial hygiene programs).

NIOSH funding may be used to support training in core and allied disciplines for undergraduate and advanced degrees, including, but not limited to BS, BSN, MSN, MOH, MSPH, MPH, MS, DrPH, ScD, PhD, and DNP. NIOSH funding may also be used to support students in academic certificate programs (post-baccalaureate level only) in the core and allied disciplines of OSH. Non-academic certificate programs are not authorized under this program.

Applicants may request support for academic certificate trainees under their academic training program at the post-baccalaureate level only. Trainees must meet the admission requirements for the academic certificate program of the institution. The academic certificate program must be described and recognized as a formal academic program by the applicant institution, with courses and experiences to enhance trainees skills, knowledge, and practice in OSH. The need for academic certificate training must be fully documented. Academic certificate trainees may receive support through NIOSH funds for tuition and fees, but may not receive stipends, travel support, or support for other non-tuition expenses.

Required Academic Content. Trainees at the graduate level must be instructed in the responsible conduct of research. NIOSH follows the NIH policies for this requirement. Topics should include scientific integrity (including specific responsibilities of the institution and the student), conflict of interest, responsible authorship, policies for handling misconduct, data management, data sharing, and policies regarding the use of human and animal subjects.

Academic training programs supported by NIOSH have been developed to meet specific OSH training needs and demands for workforce safety and health. For each academic training program, and if applicable, each academic certificate program proposed, the applicant should thoroughly describe:

• A documented need for the program.
• The Program Director’s qualifications in managing a high-quality academic training program.
• The program’s curriculum, with core competencies that will fully prepare trainees to be effective and successful in OSH.
• The qualifications and background of the program’s faculty and staff in OSH academic training, academic certificate training, research, or practice.
• Details on past performance including trainees career placements and advancements after graduation.
• A Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) plan that demonstrates a commitment to DEI in all aspect of the TPG and specifically addresses the recruitment, retention, graduation, and placement of trainees from underserved and underrepresented groups. The DEI plan should be reflected in the TPG's core values, mission, and outputs.
• An evaluation plan to determine the program’s effectiveness and impact.

Essential Elements for Non-Academic Training Project Grants. Non-academic training programs supported by NIOSH have been developed to meet specific training needs of targeted populations. Applicants should thoroughly describe:

• A documented need for the training program.
• The Program Director’s qualifications in managing a high-quality training program.
• The program’s learning objectives and specific aims to be effective, impactful, and successful.
• Details should be provided on the program's past performance. For example, number of training opportunities offered, number of trainees reached, trainees' evaluation of training experience.
• The program’s faculty / instructors and their qualifications and history of success in OSH training.
• A Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) plan that demonstrates a commitment to DEI in all aspect of the TPG and specifically addresses reaching trainees from underserved and underrepresented groups. The DEI plan should be reflected in the TPG's core values, mission, and outputs.
• An evaluation plan to determine the program’s effectiveness and impact.

The overall objective of this FOA is to solicit meritorious and rigorous applications that will build on NIOSH's successful, dynamic training grant program. The expected objectives / outcomes by the end of the period of performance are for there to be an increase in highly trained, knowledgeable individuals with varying skills to positively impact the health, safety, and well-being of our nation's workforce through a broad range of training programs. Through academic and non-academic programs alike, there should be an increase in capacity to promote OSH in a variety of settings and sectors.

The United States Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving nationwide improvements in health for a society in which all people live long, healthy lives. The vision, mission, and goals are found in Healthy People 2030, a PHS-led national activity for setting priority areas to achieve better health in the United States by the year 2030. This funding opportunity announcement (FOA) is closely linked to several overarching goals of Healthy People 2030, with the intent to prevent diseases, injuries, and deaths due to working conditions.

NIOSH is mandated to provide an adequate supply of qualified personnel to carry out the purposes of the Occupational Safety and Health Act. NIOSH supported TPGs are an important mechanism of meeting the demand for qualified safety and health practitioners and researchers to protect workers.

NIOSH supported TPGs help translate scientific discoveries into practice through effective education, training, and outreach. TPG trainees and key personnel collaborate with stakeholders to develop innovative approaches to improving workplace safety and health, by the translation of research to practice and prevention through design.

Through the NIOSH TPGs a broad range of worker populations may be positively impacted. The applicant should clearly describe the geographical or targeted population they will reach.

When relevant to the goals of the TPG, applicants should describe briefly how the findings and or training may be used to promote, enhance, or advance translation of the research into practice or may be used to inform public health policy to move the field of occupational health and safety forward. NIOSH has established a Research to Practice (r2p) approach to reduce or eliminate occupational illnesses and injury by increasing the transfer and translation of knowledge, interventions, and technologies into highly effective prevention practices and products into the workplace.

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

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

Higher Education Institutions

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

The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for CDC / NIOSH 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)

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)
• 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
• Bona Fide Agents: a Bona Fide Agent is an agency/organization identified by the state as eligible to apply under the state eligibility in lieu of a state application. If applying as a bona fide agent of a state or local government, a legal, binding agreement from the state or local government as documentation of the status is required. Attach with "Other Attachment Forms" when submitting via Grants.gov.

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 HHS Grants Policy Statement are not allowed.

For this announcement, applicants may not include collaborators or consultants from foreign institutions. All applicable federal laws and policies apply.

Applicant Organizations

Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. Applicants must have a valid Dun and Bradstreet Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number in order to begin each of the following registrations. 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.
• NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code Foreign organizations must obtain an NCAGE code (in lieu of a CAGE code) in order to register in SAM.
• eRA Commons - Applicants must have an active DUNS number 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. All applicant organizations must register with Grants.gov. Please visit www.Grants.gov at least 30 days prior to submitting your application to familiarize yourself with the registration and submission processes. The one-time registration process will take three to five days to complete. However, it is best to start the registration process at least two weeks prior to application submission.

PLEASE NOTE: For applications due on or after January 25, 2022, applicants must have a unique entity identifier (UEI) at the time of application submission. Grant application forms and instructions will be updated to reflect and require UEI instead of DUNS.

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 with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed training program as the Program Director (PD) 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 CDC/NIOSH support. TPGs are allowed one Program Director.

Responsiveness

Was the application received from an eligible organization listed in Section III of the FOA?

Was the project period for the application acceptable? Applications that exceed the allowable project period will be considered non-responsive and will not be reviewed. Applicants submitting a new application should request a project period of up to 3 years. Applicants submitting renewal applications should request a project period of up to 5 years. Applicants submitting a revision application may not exceed the length of the current grant award and must be for a period of least 3 years.

For an academic training program is the total cost (direct and indirect) for each 12-month budget period within the ceiling of academic training programs (including consortium F&A costs) and fit the 70/30 rule?

The following lists the limits on budget requests for academic training programs:
Undergraduate Programs may request a total budget (direct and indirect) of up to $50,000/year;
Graduate Programs may request a total budget (direct and indirect) of up to $150,000/year; and
Occupational Medicine Residency Programs may request a total budget (direct and indirect) of up to $250,000/year.

Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness by CDC/NIOSH. CDC/NIOSH will screen review all applications for responsiveness. Incomplete and/or non-responsive applications will not be reviewed. Applicants will be requested to withdraw non-responsive applications.

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

An educational institution may submit one Training Project Grant application with up to 3 academic training programs under this announcement. An applicant educational institution is the main campus of the institute as listed in the U. S. Department of Education Database of Accredited Postsecondary Institutions and Programs.

For non-academic programs, an organization or institution may submit one application requesting support for one training program.

The CDC/NIOSH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time. This means that the CDC/NIOSH 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).

A NIOSH trainee must be a citizen or a noncitizen national of the United States or have been lawfully admitted for permanent residence at the time of appointment. Additional details on citizenship requirements are available in HHS/CDC grants policies as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.

Individuals with temporary student visas are not eligible for NIOSH support.

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.

Applicants must use FORMS-G application packages for due dates on or after January 25, 2022 and must use FORMS-F application packages for due dates on or before January 24, 2022.

Application guides for FORMS-G application packages will be posted to the How to Apply - Application Guide page no later than October 25, 2021.

It is critical that applicants follow the Training (T) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide except where instructed in this FOA 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

A letter of intent is required. The information allows NIOSH 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, address, email, and telephone number of the PD
• Names of other key personnel
• Institution
• Number and title of this funding opportunity

The letter of intent should be emailed to:

Michael Goldcamp, PhD
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Telephone: 304-285-5951
Email: [email protected]

Interested applicants are strongly encouraged to direct questions and discuss their intent to apply with Elizabeth H. Maples, PhD, CIH at [email protected].

For this specific FOA, the Research Training Program Plan is limited to 10 pages for each academic program proposed. For non-academic programs, Research Training Program Plan is limited to 10 pages. Renewal applications should include responses to the previous review.

The page limit includes all text, tables, graphs, figures, diagrams, and charts. The required NIOSH Tables for academic programs (NIOSH Tables 1 and 2) do not count towards the page limitations.

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.

Format for Attachments

Designed to maximize system-conducted validations, multiple separate attachments are required for a complete application. When the application is received by the agency, all submitted forms and all separate attachments are combined into a single document that is used by peer reviewers and agency staff. Applicants should ensure that all attachments are uploaded to the system.

CDC requires all text attachments to the Adobe application forms be submitted as PDFs and that all text attachments conform to the agency-specific formatting requirements noted in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide at .How to Apply - Application Guide.

Applicants must use FORMS-G application packages for due dates on or after January 25, 2022 and must use FORMS-F application packages for due dates on or before January 24, 2022.

Application guides for FORMS-G application packages will be posted to the How to Apply - Application Guide page no later than October 25, 2021.

Please use the form and instructions for SF424 (R&R) Form F. Applicants must use FORMS-F application packages for due dates on or before January 24, 2022.

Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application.

Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application.

Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application

Project Summary/Abstract. Provide an abstract of the entire application. Include the objectives, rationale, and design of the training program, as well as key activities in the training plan. Indicate the planned duration of appointments, the projected number of trainees including their levels (i.e., predoctoral, postdoctoral, short-term faculty), and intended trainee outcomes.

Other Attachments.

The filename provided for each Other Attachment will be the name used for the bookmark in the electronic application in eRA Commons.

Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application.

Follow all instructions provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide with the following additional modifications:

• Both the Training Budget Component and the R&R Budget Component are required for a complete application.
• Include all personnel other than the Training Program Director in the other Personnel section, including clerical and administrative staff.
• Use the section on Participant/Trainee Support Costs to include all allowable categories of funds requested to support participants in the program.

Introduction

1. Introduction to Application. This is required for Resubmission applications only and should clearly address the weaknesses identified in the summary statement. The introduction is limited to 1 page.

Training Program Section

2. Program Plan. The PHS 398 Research Training Program Plan is limited to 10 pages.

For a proposal that includes more than one academic training program there is a limit of 10 pages for each academic program proposed. Each academic proposed should be a separate narrative.

For non-academic training programs within the 10-page limit, clearly discuss:

• Significance of the training program in meeting an identified need in occupational safety and health.
• Provide details on Program Director's qualifications. Discuss qualifications of key personnel in OSH.
• Describe the TPG's innovation and approach in OSH training. Provide details on the program's evaluation plan and describe the program's curriculum and procedures for having dynamic, relevant content for trainees.
• Thoroughly describe the TPG's approach to diversity, equity, and inclusion throughout all aspects of their training program including curriculum and training materials. Provide details on past and planned efforts to recruit and retain trainees from underserved and underrepresented groups.
• Describe the training environment and how it will contribute to the success of the TPG.

For academic training programs, within the 10-page limit for each academic program (up to 3 programs are allowed), clearly discuss:

• The TPG's significance in meeting a need for the academic training. Provide a rational for the training program and its potential of a positive impact on worker health, safety, and well-being. Applicants should thoroughly describe their approach to diversity, equity, and inclusion throughout all aspects of their training program including curriculum and training materials. Provide details on past and planned efforts to recruit and retain trainees from underserved and underrepresented groups.
• Provide details on Program Director's qualifications. Discuss qualifications of key personnel in OSH practice and/or research and mentoring trainees.
• Discuss the TPG's recruitment, applicant pool, mentoring and training records that speak to the success of the program in placing trainees after graduation.

3. Plan for Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research. This section is applicable to graduate and post-doctoral academic training only. Describe the plan for instructing trainees on scientific integrity and ethical principles in research. Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for Plan for Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

4. Plan for Instruction in Methods for Enhancing Reproducibility. Not applicable for training grants.

5. Multiple PD/PI. Not applicable for TPGs.

6. Progress Report. Describe the accomplishments of the training program during the last project period for renewal applications. New applications should describe accomplishment over the past 5 years (if applicable). Summarize the accomplishments of the trainees and faculty and key personnel. This should include responses to the TPG's previous review (if applicable). The Progress Report is limited to 5 pages.

Faculty, Trainees and Training Record Section

7. Participating Faculty Biosketches. Biosketches are limited to 5 pages.

8. Letters of Support.

9. Data Tables. Applicants for academic training programs must complete and submit NIOSH Tables 1 and 2 found on the NIOSH Office of Extramural Program's webpage. These tables do not count towards the page limitations. Applicants should summarize, in the body of the application, key data from the NIOSH Tables that highlight the characteristics of the applicant pool, the educational and career outcomes of participants, and other factors that contribute to the overall positive impact and success of the program.

Data Tables (1-8) referred to in the SF424 Application Guidance are not required for this announcement.

Other Training Program Section

10. Vertebrate Animals. Generally, not applicable.

11. Select Agent Research. Generally, not applicable.

12. Consortium/Contractual Arrangements

13. Appendix

Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Do not use the appendix to circumvent page limits. For training grants only documents that are key for the review of the program, such as course syllabi, course descriptions and surveys results should be included. A maximum of 5 PDF documents are allowed in the appendix. The number of pages in each PDF document should not exceed 10. Additionally, up to 3 publication may be included that are not publicly available. Follow all instruction for the Appendix as descibed in the SF424 R&R Application Guide.

Note to Applicants Submitting Multiple Training Programs: When including more than 1 academic training program in your application (up to 3 academic training programs are allowed) the institution must designate one Program Director (PD) / Principal Investigator for the application. That individual should be the PD for one of the academic programs being proposed. The other academic program narrative(s) should be included as a separate subproject in the Program Plan. The Program Plan should be submitted as a single PDF. The key program faculty for each academic program should be clearly identified and qualifications described in the narrative. Each academic training program will be peer reviewed and assigned an impact score. All impact scores will be provided in the summary statement.

The impact score for the primary project will be the impact score of record for the application and entered into eRA.

Applicants should submit one budget which includes Research & Related Budget Form, Research & Related Budget Cumulative Budget, PHS 398 Training Budget Form, PHS 398 Training Budget - Cumulative Budget, and Budget Justification. The budget justification should clearly indicate costs for each proposed academic program for the first year of support.

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.

All applicant organizations must obtain a DUN and Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number as the Universal Identifier when applying for Federal grants or cooperative agreements. The DUNS number is a nine-digit number assigned by Dun and Bradstreet Information Services. An AOR should be consulted to determine the appropriate number. If the organization does not have a DUNS number, an AOR should complete the US D&B D-U-N-S Number Request Web Form or contact Dun and Bradstreet by telephone directly at 1-866-705-5711 (toll-free) to obtain one. A DUNS number will be provided immediately by telephone at no charge. Note this is an organizational number. Individual Program Directors/Principal Investigators do not need to register for a DUNS number.

PLEASE NOTE: For applications due on or after January 25, 2022, applicants must have a unique entity identifier (UEI) at the time of application submission. Grant application forms and instructions will be updated to reflect and require UEI instead of DUNS.

Additionally, all applicant organizations must register in the System for Award Management (SAM). Organizations must maintain the registration with current information at all times during which it has an application under consideration for funding by CDC and, if an award is made, until a final financial report is submitted or the final payment is received, whichever is later. SAM is the primary registrant database for the Federal government and is the repository into which an entity must provide information required for the conduct of business as a recipient. Additional information about registration procedures may be found at the SAM internet site at SAM.gov and the SAM.gov Knowledge Base.

If an award is granted, the recipient organization must notify potential sub-recipients that no organization may receive a subaward under the grant unless the organization has provided its DUNS number to the recipient organization.

Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants are strongly encouraged to allocate additional time and submit in advance of the deadline to ensure they have time to make any corrections that might be necessary for successful submission. This includes the time necessary to complete the application resubmission process that may be necessary, if errors are identified during validation by Grants.gov and the NIH eRA systems. The application package is not complete until it has passed the Grants.gov and NIH eRA Commons submission and validation processes. Applicants will use a platform or system to submit applications.

ASSIST is a commonly used platform because it provides a validation of all requirements prior to submission. If ASSIST detects errors, then the applicant must correct errors before their application can be submitted. Applicants should view their applications in ASSIST after submission to ensure accurate and successful submission through Grants.gov. If the submission is not successful and post-submission errors are found, then those errors must be corrected, and the application must be resubmitted in ASSIST.

Applicants are able to access, view, and track the status of their applications in the eRA Commons.

Information on the submission process is provided in the SF-424 (R&R) Application Guidance and ASSIST User Guide.

Note: HHS/CDC grant submission procedures do not provide a grace period beyond the grant application due date and time to correct any error or warning notices of noncompliance with application instructions that are identified by Grants.gov or eRA systems (i.e., error correction window). Errors must be corrected, and a changed/corrected application must be submitted to Grants.gov on or before the application due date and time. If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late.

Applicants who encounter problems when submitting their applications must attempt to resolve them by contacting the NIH eRA Service desk at:

Toll-free: 1-866-504-9552; Phone: 301-402-7469

http://grants.nih.gov/support/index.html

Hours: Mon-Fri, 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Eastern Time (closed on Federal holidays)

Problems with Grants.gov can be resolved by contacting the Grants.gov Contact Center at:
Toll-free: 1-800-518-4726
https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html
[email protected]

Hours: 24 hours a day, 7 days a week; closed on Federal holidays

It is important that applicants complete the application submission process well in advance of the due date time.

After submission of your application package, applicants will receive a "submission receipt" email generated by Grants.gov. Grants.gov will then generate a second e-mail message to applicants which will either validate or reject their submitted application package. A third and final e-mail message is generated once the applicant's application package has passed validation and the grantor agency has confirmed receipt of the application.

Unsuccessful Submissions: If an application submission was unsuccessful, the applicant must:

1. Track submission and verify the submission status (tracking should be done initially regardless of rejection or success).

2. Check emails from both Grants.gov and NIH eRA Commons for rejection notices. If the status states "rejected" and there is time before the deadline, correct the problem(s) and resubmit as soon as possible.

Electronically submitted applications must be submitted no later than 5:00 PM Eastern Time, on the listed application due date.

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

Note: HHS/CDC grant submission procedures do not provide a period of time beyond the application due date time to correct any error or warning notices of noncompliance with application instructions that are identified by Grants.gov or eRA systems (i.e., error correction window).

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

This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.

All HHS/CDC/NIOSH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in federal regulations, 45 CFR 75 and the HHS Grants Policy Statement.

For Academic Training Programs
Trainee Costs: A minimum of 70% of requested funds in direct costs must go to support Trainee Costs that provide stipends, tuition and fees, and trainee travel. A maximum of 30% direct costs of the TPG budget may go to support Training-Related Expenses that include salary support for faculty and staff, supplies, equipment, and non-trainee travel.

Applicants may request trainee support for Academic Certificate Training programs in approved graduate level core or allied disciplines of OSH. Trainee support for academic certificate programs is limited to tuition and fees and included in the minimum 70% allocation of Trainee Costs.

Trainees may receive support for up to four years at the bachelor level; up to five years of support at the predoctoral level and three years of support at the postdoctoral level (OMR only). Any exception to the maximum period of support requires approval from NIOSH based on a justification submitted by the institution.

Stipend levels, as well as funding amounts for tuition and fees and the institutional allowance are announced annually in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, and are also found at NIH Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA). The National Research Service Award (NRSA) policies apply to academic programs supported by this FOA. An NRSA appointment may not be held concurrently with another Federally sponsored fellowship, traineeship, or similar Federal award that provides a stipend or otherwise duplicates provisions of the NRSA.

NIOSH Trainee Stipends: Stipends are provided as a subsistence allowance to help full-time trainees defray living expenses during the training experience. Stipends are not provided as a condition of employment with either the Federal Government or the awardee institution. Stipends are not allowed for part-time trainees or academic certificate trainees. Stipends may not exceed the NIH stipend levels, determined by the NIH Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA).

The National Research Service Award (NRSA) policies apply to academic programs supported by this FOA. An NRSA appointment may not be held concurrently with another Federally sponsored fellowship, traineeship, or similar Federal award that provides a stipend or otherwise duplicates provisions of the NRSA.

Indirect Costs for Academic and Non-academic Programs
Indirect Costs (also known as Facilities & Administrative [F&A] Costs) are reimbursed at 8% of modified total direct costs (exclusive of tuition and fees, consortium costs in excess of $25,000, and expenditures for equipment) rather on the basis of a negotiated rate agreement.

Pre-award costs may be allowable as an expanded authority, but only if authorized by CDC. Note that pre-award costs are not allowable charges for stipends or tuition/fees on institutional training grants because these costs may not be charged to the grant until a trainee has been appointed and the appropriate paperwork submitted to CDC/NIOSH.

Risk Assessment Questionnaire Requirement

NOTE TO APPLICANTS: THIS IS REQUIRED

CDC is required to conduct pre-award risk assessments to determine the risk an applicant poses to meeting federal programmatic and administrative requirements by considering issues such as financial instability, insufficient management systems, non-compliance with award conditions, the charging of unallowable costs, and inexperience. The risk assessment will include an evaluation of the applicant’s CDC Risk Questionnaire, as well as a review of the applicant’s history in all available systems; including OMB-designated repositories of government-wide eligibility and financial integrity systems (see 45 CFR 75.205(a)), and other sources of historical information. These systems include but are not limited to: FAPIIS, including past performance on federal contracts as per Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act of 2009; Do Not Pay list; and System for Award Management (SAM) exclusions.

CDC requires all applicants to complete the Risk Questionnaire, OMB Control Number 0920-1132 annually. This questionnaire, along with supporting documentation must be submitted with your application by the closing date of this FOA. If your organization has completed CDC’s Risk Questionnaire within the past 12 months of the closing date of this FOA, then you must submit a copy of that questionnaire, or submit a letter signed by the authorized organization representative to include the original submission date, organization’s EIN and DUNS.

When uploading supporting documentation for the Risk Questionnaire into this application package, clearly label the documents for easy identification of the type of documentation. For example, a copy of Procurement policy submitted in response to the questionnaire may be labeled using the following format: Risk Questionnaire Supporting Documents _ Procurement Policy. Upload the questionnaire and supporting documents as an attachment in the "12. Other Attachments" section of the "R&R Other Project Information" section of the application.

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:

Program Directors 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 DC/NIOSH.

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 (SAM). Additional information may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

PLEASE NOTE: For applications due on or after January 25, 2022, applicants must have a unique entity identifier (UEI) at the time of application submission. Grant application forms and instructions will be updated to reflect and require UEI instead of DUNS.

If the applicant has an FWA number, enter the 8-digit number. Do not enter the letters FWA before the number. If a Project/Performance Site is engaged in research involving human subjects, the applicant organization is responsible for ensuring that the Project/Performance Site operates under and appropriate Federal Wide Assurance for the protection of human subjects and complies with 45 CFR Part 46 and other CDC human subject related policies described in Part II of the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide and in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.

See more tips for avoiding common errors and submitting, tracking, and viewing applications:

https://grants.nih.gov/grants/ElectronicReceipt/avoiding_errors.htm

https://grants.nih.gov/grants/ElectronicReceipt/submit_app.htm

https://era.nih.gov/files/ASSIST_user_guide.pdf

http://era.nih.gov/erahelp/ASSIST/

To expedite review, applicants are requested to notify the CDC/NIOSH Scientific Review Official by email at [email protected] when the application has been submitted. Please include the FOA number and title, PD/PI name, and title of the application.

Applicants are responsible for reporting if this application will result in programmatic, budgetary, or commitment overlap with another application or award (i.e. grant, cooperative agreement, or contract) submitted to another funding source in the same fiscal year. Programmatic overlap occurs when (1) substantially the same project is proposed in more than one application or is submitted to two or more funding sources for review and funding consideration or (2) a specific objective and the project design for accomplishing the objective are the same or closely related in two or more applications or awards, regardless of the funding source. Budgetary overlap occurs when duplicate or equivalent budgetary items (e.g., equipment, salaries) are requested in an application but already are provided by another source. Commitment overlap occurs when an individual’s time commitment exceeds 100 percent, whether or not salary support is requested in the application. Overlap, whether programmatic, budgetary, or commitment of an individual’s effort greater than 100 percent, is not permitted. Any overlap will be resolved by the CDC with the applicant and the PD/PI prior to award.

Report Submission: The applicant must upload the report as an attachment in the "12. Other Attachments" section of the "R&R Other Project Information" section of the application. The document should be labeled: "Report on Programmatic, Budgetary, and Commitment Overlap.

Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement. Any instructions provided here are in addition to the instructions in the policy.

As part of the CDC mission, applications submitted to the CDC in support of public health activities are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the CDC/NIOSH peer review system. Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. The scope of academic and non-academic training programs is very different; therefore, there are different sets of scored review criteria.

Reviewers will provide an overall impact score for each training program proposed. If more than 1 academic program is proposed (up to 3 academic programs are allowed) an overall impact score will be captured for each academic program. The overall impact score should reflect the reviewers' assessment of the likelihood that the training program will successfully meet stated goals and objectives and positively impact occupational safety and health training, locally, regionally, or nationally.

Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of the merit of the training program 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 impact. There are two sets of scored review criteria. One for academic training programs and one for non-academic training programs.

The following review criteria are to be used for academic training programs.

Academic Training Program and Environment:

Does the applicant clearly document a need for the academic program? Will the proposed academic training program fill a gap in a specific local, regional, or national workforce need? Does the applicant reference sources in determining need for the academic training program? Does the applicant describe the potential impact of the program in meeting the local, regional, or national needs for occupational safety and health training? Do the objectives, design and direction of the proposed academic training program ensure outstanding, interdisciplinary OSH training? Is the proposed training program designed to prepare students for successful and productive careers in OSH practice and / or research? Does the training program, through courses, training experiences, interdisciplinary experiences and other activities promote participation by all NIOSH trainees in highly significant, high quality events? Does the academic program involve innovative approaches to training and education relevant to the OSH field?

Does the applicant demonstrate a commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion in all aspects of their training program including addressing occupational health disparities? This commitment may be reflected in the TPG's core values, mission, and outputs, including student and faculty diversity, training, research training, and outreach. Is there evidence of an institutional commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion? Does the program have a track record for recruitment and retention of students from underserved and underrepresented populations?

Is there evidence of collaboration with other institutions, including Minority Serving Institutions, businesses, federal, state, or local public health and regulatory agencies, and labor and professional associations. Applicants must describe partnerships and collaboration with NIOSH supported training grants (TPGs and ERCs) in their HHS Federal Health Region.

Is there a rigorous evaluation plan to determine the effectiveness of the training program, including interdisciplinary activities? Are there plans to obtain and incorporate feedback from stakeholders, including current and former NIOSH trainees? Is there evidence of an active Advisory Committee to guide the TPG leadership for continual improvement? Is there a formal plan to provide oversight of trainee progress and high-quality mentoring for career guidance to provide the highest possible level of trainee success?

Does the training program’s past performance reflect successful recruitment and graduation of highly qualified and motivated trainees (success may be determined by the number of NIOSH trainees, trainee awards, presentations and publications, and employment history)?

Is there a critical mass of faculty and students to sustain the program? Does the training program address the distinct workplace characteristics and worker health needs in the TPG’s region or target area? Does the applicant describe the accreditation status of the training program?

Are the training and research facilities and environment conducive to preparing trainees for successful careers as OHS practitioners or researchers? Is there evidence of an institutional commitment to the training program s goals?

In addition to the review criteria above, if applicable, academic certificate programs should describe the unique needs the proposed program will address and how certificate trainees will use their training to advance their OSH practice. What training needs will the academic certificate meet? What special recruitment strategies have been developed to identify well-qualified, highly motivated trainees? Are the application, review and selection processes for academic certificate trainees clearly described? Will the academic certificate program be coordinated with the academic degree programs in the same specialty area to enhance trainee’s learning experience? Is there a rigorous evaluation plan to determine the effectiveness of the academic certificate program?

Academic Program Director:

Does the Program Director have the scientific background, expertise, and administrative and training experience to provide strong leadership, direction, management, and administration of the proposed training program? Does the Program Director plan to commit sufficient effort to ensure the program’s success? Does the Program Director have a strong track record in successfully training and mentoring students?

Academic Training Program Faculty:

Is the faculty highly qualified, with strong histories of teaching and obtaining support through other mechanisms (federal, state, or private sector)? Is the faculty accomplished OSH practitioners, or research investigators, as evidenced by peer-reviewed publications or other outputs?

Does the TPG faculty have a strong record of training and mentoring? Is there a mechanism by which junior faculty will obtain guidance from the program to ensure their successful training and mentoring of trainees?

If an academic certificate program is proposed; the following should be considered: Does the Program Director have prior experience providing leadership for a high quality, relevant academic certificate program? Do the faculty have prior experience providing teaching and mentoring for certificate trainees? Is there evidence of program faculty’s successful involvement in teaching certificate trainees?

Trainees:

Is there a recruitment plan with strategies to attract well-qualified, highly motivated candidates for the training program, including students from underrepresented and underserved populations? Is there a competitive applicant pool in sufficient numbers to warrant the proposed size of the training program? Does the application present a well-defined and transparent process, and set of criteria, for trainee selection?

Is there a sufficient strategy to monitor trainee progress to ensure the highest possible level of success for each trainee?

In addition to the review criteria above, if applicable, academic certificate programs should clearly describe the applicant pool, eligibility requirements and admissions process for certificate trainees. Is there a strategy to monitor certificate trainee progress to ensure the highest possible level of success for each trainee?

Training Record:

How successful are NIOSH trainees in obtaining careers that advance the field of OSH? Are most students obtaining degrees within an appropriate timeframe? Does the program have an appropriate training record regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion?

For trainees on a research path, is there evidence of career advancement and development, such as grants awarded, special honors or awards, a record of publications and other outputs?

For graduate and post-graduate academic programs are trainees instructed in the responsible conduct of research, including scientific integrity, conflict of interest, responsible authorship, data management, data sharing, and policies for handling misconduct and regarding the use of human and animal subjects?

In addition to the review criteria above, academic certificate programs should clearly describe the process and requirements for successful completion to obtain the academic certificate. Is there a strategy to capture certificate trainee’s career advancement after successful completion?

The following review criteria are to be used for non-academic training programs.

Significance:

Significance is evaluated by considering the impact the TPG has in meeting an identified regional or national need for occupational safety and health training. Does the training program have the potential to successfully meet stated goals and objectives and impact the health and safety of the workforce through its training program? Does the creation or continuation of the training program advance the field of OSH and worker protection? Does the training program’s past performance reflect a successful track record of OSH training? Does the training program's past performance indicate a commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion? Is there evidence that the program integrates with and complements other NIOSH supported training programs?

Key Personnel:

Does the TPG Program Director have experience in managing a high-quality training program? Are key personnel identified with strong histories of providing training in OSH to their target audience? Are the key personnel accomplished OSH practitioners or research investigators, as evidenced by their biosketches, experiences, and / or outputs?

Innovation:

Does the training program involve innovative approaches to achieving and maintaining highly effective training relevant to the OSH field? Is there an innovative approach in recruiting underserved and underrepresented individuals into the training program?

Approach:

Is there an evaluation plan to determine the effectiveness of the training program? Is there evidence of active participation by an Advisory Committee? If applicable, what is the accreditation status of the training program? Does the training program have a successful history of reaching its intended target audience? Is there evidence of reaching underserved and underrepresented individuals? Are there plans to obtain and incorporate feedback from stakeholders, including current and former trainees to improve performance?

Environment:

Will the training environment contribute to the probability of success for the TPG? Is there evidence of organizational or institutional commitment to support the goals of the TPG? Are the facilities and equipment adequate and appropriate to support the described OSH training?

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.

Protections for Human Subjects

Generally not applicable. Reviewers should bring any concerns to the attention of the Scientific Review Officer.

Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Individuals Across the Lifespan

Generally not applicable. Reviewers should bring any concerns to the attention of the Scientific Review Officer.

Vertebrate Animals

Generally not applicable. Reviewers should bring any concerns to the attention of the Scientific Review Officer.

Biohazards

Generally not applicable. Reviewers should bring any concerns to the attention of the Scientific Review Officer.

Resubmissions

For Resubmissions, the committee will evaluate the application as now presented, taking into consideration the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group and changes made to the project.

Renewals

For Renewals, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period, including on the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion plan, and Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research (graduate and post-graduate programs). Does the application describe the program’s accomplishments over the past funding period(s)? Is the program achieving its training objectives? Has the program evaluated the quality and effectiveness of the training experience, and is there evidence that the evaluation outcomes and feedback from trainees have been acted upon? Are changes proposed that are likely to improve or strengthen the training experience during the next project period? Does the program continue to evolve and reflect changes in the research area in which the training occurs?

Revisions

For Revisions, the committee will consider the appropriateness of the proposed expansion of the scope of the project. If the Revision application relates to a specific aspect of the original application that was not recommended for approval by the committee, then the committee will consider whether the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group are adequate and whether substantial changes are clearly evident.

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.

Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research

All applications for graduate and post-graduate training support under this FOA must include a plan to fulfill NIH requirements for instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR). Considering the specific characteristics of the training program, the level of trainee experience, and the circumstances of the trainees, the reviewers will evaluate the adequacy of the proposed RCR training in relation to the following five required components: 1) Format - Does the plan satisfactorily address the format of instruction, e.g., lectures, coursework and/or real-time discussion groups, including face-to-face interaction? (A plan involving only on-line instruction is not acceptable.); 2) Subject Matter Does the plan include a sufficiently broad selection of subject matter, such as conflict of interest, authorship, data management, human subjects and animal use, laboratory safety, research misconduct, research ethics? 3) Faculty Participation - Does the plan adequately describe how faculty will participate in the instruction? For renewal applications, are all training faculty who served as course directors, and/or mentors during the past project period named in the application? 4) Duration of Instruction - Does the plan meet the minimum requirements for RCR, i.e., at least eight contact hours of instruction? 5) Frequency of Instruction Does the plan meet the minimum requirements for RCR, i.e., at least once during each career stage (post-baccalaureate, predoctoral, postdoctoral, and faculty levels) and at a frequency of no less than once every four years?

For renewal applications, does the progress report document acceptable RCR instruction in the five components described above? Does the plan describe how participation in RCR instruction is being monitored? Are appropriate changes in the plan for RCR instruction proposed in response to feedback and in response to evolving issues related to responsible conduct of research?

Plans and past record will be rated as ACCEPTABLE or UNACCEPTABLE, and the summary statement will provide the consensus of the review committee.

Select Agent Research

Generally not applicable. Reviewers should bring any concerns to the attention of the Scientific Review Officer.

Budget and Period of Support

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

Applications that are responsive to the criteria in the announcement and accepted for peer review will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate Scientific Review Group, convened by {CDC / NIOSH} in accordance with NIOSH peer review policy, 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 undergo a selection process in which all responsive applications will be discussed and assigned an overall impact/priority score.
• Will receive a written critique

Appeals of initial peer review will not be accepted for applications submitted response to this FOA.

Applications will be assigned to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. 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 for programmatic relevance and priority. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:

• Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as determined by scientific peer review.
• Results (outputs and outcomes) and management of prior training program awards funded by CDC/NIOSH or others.
• Relevance of proposed new training programs to regional or national OSH training needs.
• Contribution of proposed new training programs to the geographic distribution and balance of the NIOSH training portfolio comprised of TPGs and ERCs.
• Commitment of the applicant institution to diversity, equity, and inclusion of trainees and faculty.
• Availability of funds.

After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD 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.

Any applications awarded in response to this FOA will be subject to the DUNS, SAM Registration, and Transparency Act requirements. If the application is under consideration for funding, CDC/NIOSH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.

PLEASE NOTE: For applications due on or after January 25, 2022, applicants must have a unique entity identifier (UEI) at the time of application submission. Grant application forms and instructions will be updated to reflect and require UEI instead of DUNS.

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 grant's management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent through eRA Commons to recipient’s business official.

Awardees 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 at CDC Office of Financial Resources. This includes any recent legislation and policy applicable to awards that is highlighted on this website.

Although the financial plans of the HHS/CDC/NIOSH provide support for this program, awards pursuant to this funding opportunity depend upon the availability of funds, evidence of satisfactory progress by the recipient (as documented in required reports) and the determination that continued funding is in the best interest of the Federal government.

Expanded authorities: CDC has automatically waived the prior approvals listed in 45 CFR 75.308(d) (1) through (3) for any award resulting from an application under this FOA. In accordance with HHS regulation and CDC guidance, the awardee will have for the following Expanded Authorities:

Carryover of unobligated balances from one budget period to a subsequent budget period. Unobligated funds may be used for purposes within the scope of the project as originally approved. For academic training programs, a minimum of 70% of unobligated funds must go to Trainee Costs. Prior approval must be submitted to spend unobligated funds outside the 70/30 ratio as described in this FOA. The request must be strongly justified. Recipients will report use, or intended use, of unobligated funds in Section 12 Remarks of the annual Federal Financial Report submitted in Payment Management System (PMS). If the GMO determines that some or all the unobligated funds are not necessary to complete the project, the GMO may restrict the recipient s authority to automatically carry over unobligated balances in the future, use the balance to reduce or offset CDC funding for a subsequent budget period, or use a combination of these actions.

The Expanded Authorities will be specified in the recipient award notices issued under this FOA.

All CDC / NIOSH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the HHS Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA.

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.

• Recipients of FFA must ensure that their programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency. HHS provides 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/fact-sheet-guidance/index.html and https://www.lep.gov. 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.
• Recipients of FFA also have specific legal obligations for serving qualified individuals with disabilities. Please see http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/understanding/disability/index.html.
• HHS funded health and education programs must be administered in an environment free of sexual harassment. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/sex-discrimination/index.html; https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/shguide.html; and https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/publications/upload/fs-sex.pdf.
• Recipients of FFA must also administer their programs in compliance with applicable federal religious nondiscrimination laws and applicable federal conscience protection and associated anti-discrimination laws. Collectively, these laws prohibit exclusion, adverse treatment, coercion, or other discrimination against persons or entities on the basis of their consciences, religious beliefs, or moral convictions. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/conscience/conscience-protections/index.html and https://www.hhs.gov/conscience/religious-freedom/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.

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.

Institutional NRSA training grants must be administered in accordance with the current NRSA section of the NIH Grants Policy Statement - Institutional Research Training Grants.

The taxability of stipends is described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. Policies regarding the Ruth L. Kirschstein-NRSA payback obligation are explained in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

ARs outline the administrative requirements found in 45 CFR Part 75, the HHS Grants Policy Statement, and other requirements as mandated by statute or CDC policy. Recipients must comply with administrative and national policy requirements as appropriate. For more information on the Code of Federal Regulations, visit the National Archives and Records Administration.

Information on additional requirements that apply to this FOA can be found at the following CDC website https://www.cdc.gov/grants/additional-requirements/.

Generally applicable ARs:

AR-1: Human Subjects Requirements

AR-2: Requirements for Inclusion of Women and Racial and Ethnic Minorities in Research

AR-3: Animal Subjects Requirements

AR-9: Paperwork Reduction Act Requirements

AR-10: Smoke-Free Workplace Requirements

AR-11: Healthy People 2020

AR-12: Lobbying Restrictions

AR-13: Prohibition on Use of CDC Funds for Certain Gun Control Activities

AR-14: Accounting System Requirements

AR-16: Security Clearance Requirement

AR-21: Small, Minority, and Women-Owned Business

AR-22: Research Integrity

AR-24: Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Requirements

AR-25: Data Management and Access

AR-26: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966

AR-28: Inclusion of Persons Under the Age of 21 in Research

AR-29: Compliance with EO13513, Federal Leadership on Reducing Text Messaging while Driving, October 1, 2009

AR-30: Compliance with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973

AR-31: Research Definition

AR-32: Appropriations Act, General Provisions

AR-34: Accessibility Provisions and Non-Discrimination Requirements

AR-36: Certificates of Confidentiality

AR-37: Prohibition on certain telecommunications and surveillance services or equipment for all awards issued on or after August 13, 2020

Organization specific ARs:

AR-8: Public Health System Reporting Requirements

AR-15: Proof of Non-profit Status

AR-23: Compliance with 45 CFR Part 87

The following are additional policy requirements relevant to this FOA.

HHS Policy on Promoting Efficient Spending: Use of Appropriated Funds for Conferences and Meetings, Food, Promotional Items and Printing Publications

This policy supports the Executive Order on Promoting Efficient Spending (EO 13589), the Executive Order on Delivering and Efficient, Effective, and Accountable Government (EO 13576) and the Office of Management and Budget Memorandum on Eliminating Excess Conference Spending and Promoting Efficiency in Government (M-35-11). This policy applies to all new obligations and all funds appropriated by Congress. For more information, visit the HHS website at HHS Policy on Promoting Efficient Spending.

Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006

Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA), P.L. 109 282, as amended by section 6202 of P.L. 110 252, requires full disclosure of all entities and organizations receiving Federal funds including grants, contracts, loans and other assistance and payments through a single, publicly accessible website, http://www.usaspending.gov/. For the full text of the requirements, please review the following website: https://www.fsrs.gov/.

Plain Writing Act

The Plain Writing Act of 2010, Public Law 111-274 was signed into law on October 13, 2010. The law requires that federal agencies use "clear Government communication that the public can understand and use" and requires the federal government to write all new publications, forms, and publicly distributed documents in a "clear, concise, well-organized" manner. For more information on this law, go to: https://plainlanguage.gov/law/.

Tobacco and Nutrition Policies

The CDC supports implementing evidence-based programs and policies to reduce tobacco use and secondhand smoke exposure, and to promote healthy nutrition. CDC encourages all recipients to implement the following optional evidence-based tobacco and nutrition policies within their organizations. These policies build on the current federal commitment to reduce exposure to secondhand smoke, which includes The Pro-Children Act, 20 U.S.C. 7181-7184 that prohibits smoking in certain facilities that receive federal funds.

Tobacco:

Tobacco-free indoors no use of any tobacco products (including smokeless tobacco) or electronic cigarettes in any indoor facilities under the control of the applicant.

Tobacco-free indoors and in adjacent outdoor areas no use of any tobacco products or electronic cigarettes in any indoor facilities, within 50 feet of doorways and air intake ducts, and in courtyards under the control of the applicant.

Tobacco-free campus no use of any tobacco products or electronic cigarettes in any indoor facilities and anywhere on grounds or in outdoor space under the control of the applicant.

Nutrition:

Healthy food service guidelines that at a minimum align with Health and Human Services and General Services Administration Health and Sustainability Guidelines for Federal Concessions and Vending Operations for cafeterias, snack bars, and vending machines in any facility under the control of the recipient organization and in accordance with contractual obligations for these services. The following are resources for healthy eating and tobacco free workplaces:

https://www.gsa.gov/cdnstatic/Guidelines_for_Federal_Concessions_and_Vending_Operations.pdf

https://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpao/

https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/strategies/food-serv-guide.html

Applicants should state whether they choose to participate in implementing these two optional policies. However, no applicants will be evaluated or scored on whether they choose to participate in implementing these optional policies.

Pilot Program for Enhancement of Employee Whistleblower Protections

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

Copyright Interests Provision

This provision is intended to ensure that the public has access to the results and accomplishments of public health activities funded by CDC. Pursuant to applicable grant regulations and CDC’s Public Access Policy, Recipient agrees to submit into the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Manuscript Submission (NIHMS) system an electronic version of the final, peer-reviewed manuscript of any such work developed under this award upon acceptance for publication, to be made publicly available no later than 12 months after the official date of publication. Also, at the time of submission, Recipient and/or the Recipient’s submitting author must specify the date the final manuscript will be publicly accessible through PubMed Central (PMC). Recipient and/or Recipient s submitting author must also post the manuscript through PMC within twelve (12) months of the publisher's official date of final publication; however, the author is strongly encouraged to make the subject manuscript available as soon as possible. The recipient must obtain prior approval from the CDC for any exception to this provision.

The author's final, peer-reviewed manuscript is defined as the final version accepted for journal publication and includes all modifications from the publishing peer review process, and all graphics and supplemental material associated with the article. Recipient and its submitting authors working under this award are responsible for ensuring that any publishing or copyright agreements concerning submitted articles reserve adequate right to fully comply with this provision and the license reserved by CDC. The manuscript will be hosted in both PMC and the CDC Stacks institutional repository system. In progress reports for this award, recipient must identify publications subject to the CDC Public Access Policy by using the applicable NIHMS identification number for up to three (3) months after the publication date and the PubMed Central identification number (PMCID) thereafter.

Language Access for Persons with Limited English Proficiency

Recipients of FFA must ensure that their programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency. HHS provides 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 here and LEP website. 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 here.

Dual Use Research of Concern

On September 24, 2014, the US Government Policy (USG) for the Institutional Oversight of Life Sciences Dual Use Research of Concern was released. Recipients (foreign and domestic) receiving CDC funding on or after September 24, 2015 are subject to this policy. Research funded by CDC involving the agents or toxins named in the policy, must be reviewed to determine if it involves one or more of the listed experimental effects and if so, whether it meets the definition of DURC. This review must be completed by an Institutional Review Entity (IRE) identified by the funded institution.

Recipients also must establish an Institutional Contact for Dual Use Research (ICDUR). The award recipient must maintain records of institutional DURC reviews and completed risk mitigation plans for the term of the research grant, cooperative agreement or contract plus three years after its completion, but no less than eight years, unless a shorter period is required by law or regulation.

If a project is determined to be DURC, a risk/benefit analysis must be completed. CDC will work collaboratively with the award recipient to develop a risk mitigation plan that the CDC must approve. The USG policy can be found at https://www.phe.gov/s3/dualuse/Pages/default.aspx.

Non-compliance with this Policy may result in suspension, limitation, restriction or termination of USG funding, or loss of future USG funding opportunities for the non-compliant USG-funded research project and of USG funds for other life sciences research at the institution, consistent with existing regulations and policies governing USG funded research, and may subject the institution to other potential penalties under applicable laws and regulations.

Federal Information Security Management Act

All information systems, electronic or hard copy which contain Federal data need to be protected from unauthorized access. This also applies to information associated with NIOSH grants and contracts. Congress and the OMB have instituted laws, policies and directives that govern the creation and implementation of federal information security practices that pertain specifically to grants and contracts. The current regulations are pursuant to the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA), 44 U.S.C. 3541 et seq. The applicability of FISMA to NIOSH recipient applies only when recipients collect, store, process, transmit or use information on behalf of HHS or any of its component organizations. In all other cases, FISMA is not applicable to recipients of grants, including cooperative agreements. The recipient retains the original data and intellectual property, and is responsible for the security of this data, subject to all applicable laws protecting security, privacy, and research. When information collected by a recipient is provided to HHS, responsibility for the protection of the HHS copy of the information is transferred to HHS and it becomes the agency's responsibility to protect that information and any derivative copies as required by FISMA.

Data Management Plan(s)

CDC requires that all new collections of public health data include a Data Management Plan (DMP). For purposes of this announcement, public health data means digitally recorded factual material commonly accepted in the scientific community as a basis for public health findings, conclusions, and implementation.

This new requirement ensures that CDC is in compliance with the following: Office of Management and Budget (OMB) memorandum titled Open Data Policy Managing Information as an Asset (OMB M-13-13); Executive Order 13642 titled Making Open and Machine Readable the New Default for Government Information ; and the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) memorandum titled Increasing Access to the Results of Federally Funded Scientific Research (OSTP Memo).

The AR-25 outlines the components of a DMP and provides additional information for investigators regarding the requirements for data accessibility, storage, and preservation.

Certificates of Confidentiality: Institutions and investigators are responsible for determining whether research they conduct is subject to Section 301(d) of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act. Section 301(d), as amended by Section 2012 of the 21st Century Cures Act, P.L. 114-255 (42 U.S.C. 241(d)), states that the Secretary shall issue Certificates of Confidentiality (Certificates) to persons engaged in biomedical, behavioral, clinical, or other research activities in which identifiable, sensitive information is collected. In furtherance of this provision, CDC-supported research commenced or ongoing after December 13, 2016 in which identifiable, sensitive information is collected, as defined by Section 301(d), is deemed issued a Certificate and therefore required to protect the privacy of individuals who are subjects of such research. Certificates issued in this manner will not be issued as a separate document but are issued by application of this term and condition to this award. See Additional Requirement 36 to ensure compliance with this term and condition.

Awards made primarily for educational purposes are exempted from the PHS invention requirements and thus invention reporting is not required, as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.

Not Applicable

When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually. Continuation support will not be provided until the required forms are submitted and accepted.

Failure by the recipient institution to submit required forms in a timely, complete, and accurate manner may result in an expenditure disallowance or a delay in any continuation funding for the award.

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 HHS Grants Policy Statement for additional information on this reporting requirement.

• The institution must submit a completed Statement of Appointment (PHS Form 2271) for each trainee appointed or reappointed to the academic training grant for 8 weeks or more. This should be made within 30 days of the appointment start date. Recipients must submit the PHS 2271 data electronically using the xTrain system. More information on xTrain is available at xTrain (eRA Commons). An appointment or reappointment may begin any time during the budget period, but not before the budget period start date of the grant year.
• A notarized statement verifying possession of permanent residency documentation must be submitted with the Statement of Appointment (PHS Form 2271). Individuals with a Conditional Permanent Resident status must first meet full (non-conditional) Permanent Residency requirements before receiving support.
• Termination Notice: Within 30 days of the end of the total support period, the institution must submit a Termination Notice (PHS Form 416-7) via xTrain for each trainee appointed for eight weeks or more.

Each year TPGs will submit brief annual reports. TPGs with academic programs must submit annual performance data tables. The tables and instructions will be provided by NIOSH and capture information on enrollment, graduation, and employment status.

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

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.

CDC may impose other enforcement actions in accordance with 45 CFR 75.371- Remedies for Noncompliance, as appropriate.

The Federal award may be terminated in whole or in part as follows:

(1) By the HHS awarding agency or pass-through entity, if the non-Federal entity fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the award;

(2) By the HHS awarding agency or pass-through entity for cause;

(3) By the HHS awarding agency or pass-through entity with the consent of the non-Federal entity, in which case the two parties must agree upon the termination conditions, including the effective date and, in the case of partial termination, the portion to be terminated; or

(4) By the non-Federal entity upon sending to the HHS awarding agency or pass-through entity written notification setting forth the reasons for such termination, the effective date, and, in the case of partial termination, the portion to be terminated. However, if the HHS awarding agency or pass-through entity determines in the case of partial termination that the reduced or modified portion of the Federal award or subaward will not accomplish the purposes for which the Federal award was made, the HHS awarding agency or pass-through entity may terminate the Federal award in its entirety.

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

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

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

Elizabeth H. Maples, PhD, CIH
Scientific Program Officer
NIOSH / CDC
404-498-2557
[email protected]

Michael Goldcamp, PhD
Scientific Review Officer
NIOSH / CDC
304-285-5951
[email protected]

Janice D. Williams, Paralegal, MSA
Grants Management Specialist (CTR)
CDC
404-498-2801
[email protected]

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

Awards are made under the authorization of Sections of the Public Health Service Act as amended and under the Code Federal Regulations.

Authority: This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance and is not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health Systems Agency Review. Awards are made under the authorization of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, Section 20(a) and 21(a) (29 USC 669(a) and 29 USC 670); Federal Mine Safety and Health Act, Section 501(a), 30 USC 951(a); Section 301 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Parts 52 and 86 and 45 CFR Part 75. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.