Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
and Human Services (HHS)
EXPIRED
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) is developed as a Common Fund initiative (https://commonfund.nih.gov/) through the NIH Office of the NIH Director, Office of Strategic Coordination (https://commonfund.nih.gov/). All NIH Institutes and Centers participate in Common Fund initiatives.
DP1 NIH Director’s Pioneer Award NDPA)
Reissue of RFA-RM-18-007
None
There is no limit to the number of applications an institution may submit. Individuals may submit only one application as a PD/PI in response to this FOA. See Section III. 3. Additional Information on Eligibility.
93.310
The NIH Director’s Pioneer Award Program supports individual scientists of exceptional creativity who propose highly innovative and potentially transformative research towards the ultimate goal of enhancing human health. For the program to support the best possible researchers and research, applications are sought which reflect the full diversity of the research workforce. Individuals from diverse backgrounds and from the full spectrum of eligible institutions in all geographic locations are strongly encouraged to apply to this Funding Opportunity Announcement. In addition, applications in all topics relevant to the broad mission of NIH are welcome, including, but not limited to, topics in the behavioral, social, biomedical, applied, and formal sciences and topics that may involve basic, translational, or clinical research. To be considered pioneering, the proposed research must reflect substantially different scientific directions from those already being pursued in the investigator’s research program or elsewhere. The NIH Director’s Pioneer Award is a component of the High-Risk, High-Reward Research program of the NIH Common Fund.
April 3, 2019
Not Applicable
Applicants are encouraged to apply early to allow adequate time to make any corrections to errors found in the application during the submission process by the due date.
New Date - September 6, 2019, by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. All types of AIDS and AIDS-related applications allowed for this funding opportunity announcement are due on this date.
Applicants are encouraged to apply early to allow adequate time to make any corrections to errors found in the application during the submission process by the due date.
April 2020
May 2020
September 2020
New Date - September 7, 2019 per issuance of NOT-RM-19-007. (Original Expiration Date: September 10, 2019)
Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions.
Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
The NIH Director's Pioneer Award supports individual scientists of exceptional creativity who propose highly innovative and broadly impactful research towards the ultimate goal of enhancing human health.
In order to support the most innovative and impactful research, the NIH recognizes the need to promote a diverse research workforce. Applications to this award program should reflect the full diversity of potential applicants, applicant institutions, and research topic areas. Applications from talented researchers with diverse backgrounds underrepresented in research, including underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, persons with disabilities, and women are strongly encouraged to apply to this Funding Opportunity Announcement. Outstanding research is conducted at a broad spectrum of institutions. In seeking to support the highest quality research, this Funding Opportunity Announcement encourages applications from the full range of eligible institutions, including those that may serve primarily underrepresented groups, those that may be less research-intensive, and from all domestic geographic locations. Applications are welcome in all research topics that have the potential ultimately to have a substantial impact on human health. In addition to the nominal biomedical sciences, these include, but are not limited to, relevant research topics in the behavioral, social, applied, and formal sciences. The potential for impact on human health may be near term (clinical or translational research) or long term (basic research). The paramount features of the research proposed must be innovation and magnitude of potential impact.
In the Pioneer Award program, emphases are on the qualities of the investigator, the innovativeness, and potential impact of the proposed research. Preliminary data and detailed experimental plans are not requested. To be considered pioneering, the proposed research must reflect substantially different ideas from those being pursued in the investigator’s current research program or elsewhere. The Pioneer Award is not intended to expand a current research program into the area of the proposed project. While the research direction may rely on the applicant’s prior work and expertise as its foundation, it cannot be an obvious extension or scale-up of a current research enterprise which may be competitive as a new or renewal R01 application. Rather, the proposed project must reflect a fundamental new insight, and which may involve exceptionally innovative approaches and/or radically unconventional hypotheses. Applications for projects that are extensions of ongoing research should not be submitted.
Pioneer awardees are required to commit the major portion (more than 6 person-months or at least 51%) to activities supported by the Pioneer Award research project in the first three years of the project period. Effort expended toward teaching, administrative, or clinical duties should not be included in this calculation. Awardees may reduce effort to a minimum of 4 person-months (33%) and a minimum of 3 person-months (25%) in the fourth and fifth years, respectively, to help them transition to other sources of support since Pioneer Awards cannot be renewed. Applicants with current research commitments equal to 6 person-months or more must adjust their effort on existing grants during the award to devote the required minimum effort to the Pioneer Award project. Investigators who will not be able to meet this requirement should not submit applications.
The NIH Director's Pioneer Award is part of the High-Risk, High-Reward Research program funded through the NIH Common Fund, which supports cross-cutting programs that are expected to have exceptionally high impact. All Common Fund initiatives invite investigators to develop bold, innovative, and often risky approaches to address problems that may seem intractable or to seize new opportunities that offer the potential for rapid progress.Grant: A support mechanism providing money, property, or both to an eligible entity to carry out an approved project or activity.
The OER Glossary and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on these application types.
Need help determining whether you are doing a clinical trial?
NIH intends to commit approximately $8,000,000 in FY 2020 to fund approximately 7 awards.
The project period is limited to five years.
Higher Education Institutions
The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
For-Profit Organizations
Governments
Applicant organizations
Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as possible. The NIH Policy on Late Submission of Grant Applications states that failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission.
Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))
All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account. PD(s)/PI(s) should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate their existing account with the applicant organization in eRA Commons. If the PD/PI is also the organizational Signing Official, they must have two distinct eRA Commons accounts, one for each role. Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.
Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with his/her organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for NIH support.
Only single PD/PI applications are allowed. Applications with multiple PD(s)/PI(s) will not be accepted."
This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time. This means that the NIH will not accept:
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.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed,
with the following additional instructions:
Agency Routing Identifier Field: Enter Science Area Designations. Designate two scientific areas (a primary and secondary) from the list below. For each area, enter the one-digit code and abbreviation (e.g., 1 BSS).
1 BSS - Behavioral and Social Science
2 CB - Chemical Biology
3 CTR - Clinical and Translational Research
4 IDI - Infectious Diseases and Immunology
5 IE - Instrumentation and Engineering
6 MCB - Molecular and Cellular Biology
7 NS - Neuroscience
8 HIB - High-Throughput and Integrative Biology
9 BCB - Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
The Science Area Designations are to assist in assigning applications to reviewers. The science areas are very broad and frequently overlap. Pioneer Award reviewers are chosen for their breadth of knowledge, expertise, and their ability to review a broad range of applications. Choose the primary and secondary science areas that are most appropriate for your proposed project.
IMPORTANT: For each of the two science area designations, enter the one-digit code followed by one space and then the corresponding abbreviation. Enter the primary area first, followed by a semicolon, then enter secondary area.
Correct Example: 1 BSS; 7 NS
Note: The two scientific area designations (one-digit code and abbreviation for each) must also be included at the beginning of the Essay. See information under Research Strategy below.
Type of Application: Must be New .
Proposed Project: Enter start date: 09/30/2020; enter end date: 07/31/2025.
Total Federal Funds Requested: Enter $3,500,000 (see note below).
Total Non-Federal Funds: Enter $0.
Total Federal & Non-Federal Funds: Enter $3,500,000.
Estimated Program Income: Enter $0.
Note: The Budget Request is entered only in Fields "Total Federal Funds Requested" and "Total Federal & Non-Federal Funds" as described above. Funds may be requested for personnel (including collaborators), supplies, equipment, sub-contracts, and other allowable costs. Only the five-year total $3,500,000 should be entered in Fields "Total Federal Funds Requested" and "Total Federal & Non-Federal Funds." Applicable Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs will be determined at the time of award and should not be included in the budget request. A detailed budget and other budget forms are not requested and will not be accepted.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed,
with the following modifications:
Bibliography & References Cited: DO NOT USE. Reference citations are not required. Those considered to be essential may be included in the essay and will be included in the page limit.
Facilities & Other Resources Statement: 1 page maximum.
Equipment: DO NOT USE.
Other Attachments: DO NOT USE.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed
with the following additional instructions:
Profile Project Director/Principal Investigator Field Current and Pending Support: Attach a list of Current and Pending Support from all sources, including current year direct costs and effort devoted to each project.
Profile Senior Key Person 1: DO NOT USE. Submit information only for PD/PI. Information on collaborators or other key personnel is not required but may be included in the Essay.
Research and Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) - Additional Senior/Key Person Profiles(s): DO NOT USE. Only the PD/PI may serve as senior/key personnel.
Research and Related Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) - Additional Biographical Sketch(es): DO NOT USE. Only the PD/PI may submit a Biographical Sketch.
Specific Aims: Do not use.
Research Strategy: Attach the Essay here, which should contain the following information. The pdf should be named "Essay.pdf."
Describe your innovative vision for addressing a major challenge or pursuing an outstanding opportunity of relevance to NIH, the importance of this challenge or opportunity, and your qualifications to engage in groundbreaking research. No detailed scientific plan should be provided since the research plan is expected to evolve during the tenure of the grant. The essay should include the following sections in the order given with the headings as shown below:
Scientific Areas: Provide 1-digit code and abbreviation for primary and secondary science areas at the beginning of essay. See "Agency Routing Identifier" information above for codes and format.
Project Title: The project title must be descriptive of the proposed project.
Project description: What is the scientific challenge or opportunity that will be addressed, and why is this important? What are the pioneering, highly innovative approaches that, if successful, would lead to groundbreaking or paradigm-shifting results? Prominently indicate that neither a detailed experimental plan nor extensive preliminary data are being provided per the FOA. However, the reviewers must still have a clear sense of the overall research to be pursued and must be convinced that the research will be pursued in a robust and rigorous manner. The writing should be at a level that conveys the significance and impact of the application to broadly knowledgeable scientists with different expertise domains.
Evidence of PD's/PI's innovativeness: What concrete evidence can you provide for your claim of innovativeness? For example, qualities common to many highly innovative people include the ability to integrate diverse sources of information; an inclination to question paradigms; a willingness to work with intellectual uncertainties; persistence in the face of failure; an ability to work collaboratively with researchers from diverse disciplines; and the energy and concentration necessary to plan and execute effective strategies for accomplishing goals.
How the planned research differs from the PD's/PI's past or current work: How does the proposed project represent a new and distinct direction for your research? While a new research direction may have the applicant's prior work and expertise as its foundation, it cannot be an obvious extension or scale-up of a current research enterprise which could be appropriate for a new or renewal R01 application. Rather, a new research direction must reflect a fundamental new insight and which may involve the development of exceptionally innovative approaches and/or the posing of radically unconventional hypotheses. Applications for projects that are extensions of ongoing research should not be submitted.
Suitability for Pioneer Award program: Why is the planned research uniquely suited to the stated goal of the Pioneer Award program rather than a more traditional grant mechanism?
Statement of research effort commitment: A statement must be included that, if chosen to receive an award, the PD/PI will commit more than 6 person-months (at least 51%) of his/her research effort to the project supported by the Pioneer Award. Applicants with current research commitments of 6 person-months or more must provide a compelling explanation describing how their effort on existing grants will be adjusted to permit them to devote the required minimum effort to the Pioneer Award project.
with the following modification:
For this FOA, the Resource Sharing Plans will be expected as Just in Time information if an award is being considered.
If you answered Yes to the question Are Human Subjects Involved? on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or Delayed Onset Study record.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start).All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed
with the following modifications:Since all applications received in response to this FOA are assigned to a single Special Emphasis Panel and initially to the Office of the Director, do not suggest assignment to a specific study section or awarding component (NIH Institute/Center). Since letters of collaboration and biosketches of collaborators are not allowed, provide the names of collaborators and list individuals who should not review your application and why to identify them for exclusion during reviewer assignment.
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
Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission. When a submission date falls on a weekend or Federal holiday , the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day.
Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies). Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH’s electronic system for grants administration. NIH and Grants.gov systems check the application against many of the application instructions upon submission. Errors must be corrected and a changed/corrected application must be submitted to Grants.gov on or before the application due date and time. If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late. Applications that miss the due date and time are subjected to the NIH Policy on Late Application Submission.
Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.
Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement .
Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.
Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.
For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit How to Apply Application Guide. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Dealing with System Issues guidance. For assistance with application submission, contact the Application Submission Contacts in Section VII.
Important reminders:
All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile Component of the SF424(R&R) Application Package. Failure to register in the Commons and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the successful submission of an electronic application to NIH. See Section III of this FOA for information on registration requirements.
The applicant organization must ensure that the DUNS number it provides on the application is the same number used in the organization’s profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Management. Additional information may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
See more tips for avoiding common errors.
Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with application instructions by the Center for Scientific Review and responsiveness by components of participating organizations, NIH. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.
Letters of Reference
Letters of reference are an important part of the Pioneer Award application. Applicants must arrange to have three (and only three) letters of reference submitted on their behalf. Applications that are missing letters of reference will be considered incomplete and will not be reviewed. Late letters will not be accepted. Letters must be submitted using the link below paper copies or emails will not be accepted.
Applicants are responsible for monitoring the submission of their letters in the eRA Commons grant folder to ensure that three letters have been submitted prior to the submission deadline.
Letters must be submitted no later than 5:00 p.m. (local time of the referee) on the Application Due Date of the competition, September 9, 2019.
To submit a letter of reference, the referee (the individual submitting the letter) will need the following information:
Funding Opportunity Number (FOA) for this announcement: RM-19-005;
The PD/PI's (Applicant's) eRA Commons User ID (Note:Referees do not need to be registered in eRA Commons and do not need their own Commons User Name only the PD/PI's (Applicant's) Commons User ID is required);
The applicant’s last name (Note: The name must match exactly the applicant’s name in eRA Commons);
The URL to the letter submission page: https://public.era.nih.gov/commons/public/reference/submitReferenceLetter.do?mode=new.
The letter of reference submission deadline: The deadline for receipt of letters is 5:00 p.m. (local time of the referee) on the Application Due Date of the competition, September 9, 2019.
Letters of reference are confidential. Applicants will not have access to the letters. Email confirmations will be sent to both the applicant and the referee. The confirmation sent to the applicant will include the referee’s name and the date and time the letter was submitted. The confirmation sent to the referee will include the referee and applicant’s names, a confirmation number, and the date and time the letter was submitted.
Note: Since email can be unreliable, it is the applicant’s responsibility to check the status of his/her letters of reference periodically in eRA Commons.
Applicants are strongly encouraged to send the following to their referees or to send their referees the following link to this information: (https://commonfund.nih.gov/pioneer/LettersofReferenceFormat).
Instructions for Referees:
Letters must be submitted to eRA Commons by 5:00 p.m. (local time of the referee), on the Application Due Date of the competition, September 9, 2019. Late letters will not be accepted and applications with fewer than three letters will not be reviewed. Letters must be submitted using the link above paper copies or emails will not be accepted.
IMPORTANT: The applicant’s name should be placed at the top of the letter. Although signatures are not required, the letter must include a signature block with the referee’s full name, title, institution, and contact information.
In two pages or less, describe the applicant’s qualities that support the applicant’s claim to scientific innovativeness and creativity. When possible, give specific examples that illustrate these qualities. Address the likelihood that the applicant will conduct groundbreaking research in the proposed research area.
Note: The letter submission page can be accessed without signing into eRA Commons, and referees do not need to be registered in eRA Commons. Referees must enter the following information when submitting letters:
REFEREE INFORMATION (the individual providing the letter of reference):
APPLICANT INFORMATION (applicants must send this information to their referees):
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. Applications submitted to the NIH in support of the NIH mission are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.
For this particular announcement, note the following: NIH Director's Pioneer Award (DP1) applications are meant to support individual scientists of exceptional creativity who propose pioneering -- and possibly transforming -- research that, if successful, will have a major impact on a broad area of relevance to the NIH. Pioneer Award applications do not require preliminary data, scientific aims, or a detailed research plan. Accordingly, reviewers will emphasize the following:
1) The significance and innovation of the proposed project
2) The investigator's evidence for past innovation and the ability to commit effort that is sufficient for the proposed project.
3) The suitability of the proposed project for the Pioneer Award mechanism, which includes evidence that the proposed research possesses sufficient innovation and potential impact such that it is more suitable for the Pioneer Award than a traditional grant mechanism, and that the proposed research represents a new research direction for the PD/PI.A new research direction is defined as a significant departure from the direction of ongoing or previously funded research in the PD's/PI's laboratory.
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials:
An application may propose a clinical trial that includes study design, methods, and intervention that are not by themselves innovative but addresses important questions or unmet needs. However, the application overall must possess a high level of innovation. A proposed Clinical Trial application may include study design, methods, and intervention that are not by themselves innovative but address important questions or unmet needs. Additionally, the results of the clinical trial may indicate that further clinical development of the intervention is unwarranted or lead to new avenues of scientific investigation.
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact."
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project rigorous? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
Are the scientific rationale and need for a clinical trial to test the proposed hypothesis or intervention well supported by clinical and/or preclinical studies, or information in the literature or knowledge of biological mechanisms? For trials focusing on clinical or public health endpoints, is this clinical trial necessary for testing the safety, efficacy or effectiveness of an intervention that could lead to a change in clinical practice, community behaviors or health care policy? For trials focusing on mechanistic, behavioral, physiological, biochemical, or other biomedical endpoints, is this trial needed to advance scientific understanding?
Is the PD/PI well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or those in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)?
Is the effort sufficient to perform the research?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
With regard to the proposed leadership for the project, do the PD/PI and key personnel have the expertise, experience, and ability to organize, manage and implement the proposed clinical trial and meet milestones and timelines? Do they have appropriate expertise in study coordination, data management and statistics? For a multicenter trial, is the organizational structure appropriate and does the application identify a core of potential center investigators and staffing for a coordinating center?
Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
Does the design/research plan include innovative elements, as appropriate, that enhance its sensitivity, potential for information or potential to advance scientific knowledge or clinical practice?
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have the investigators included plans to address weaknesses in the rigor of prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project ? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
Does the application adequately address the following, if applicable?
Study Design
Is the study design justified and appropriate to address primary and secondary outcome variable(s)/endpoints that will be clear, informative and relevant to the hypothesis being tested? Is the scientific rationale/premise of the study based on previously well-designed preclinical and/or clinical research? Given the methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions, is the study design adequately powered to answer the research question(s), test the proposed hypothesis/hypotheses, and provide interpretable results? Is the trial appropriately designed to conduct the research efficiently? Are the study populations (size, gender, age, demographic group), proposed intervention arms/dose, and duration of the trial, appropriate and well justified?
Are potential ethical issues adequately addressed? Is the process for obtaining informed consent or assent appropriate? Is the eligible population available? Are the plans for recruitment outreach, enrollment, retention, handling dropouts, missed visits, and losses to follow-up appropriate to ensure robust data collection? Are the planned recruitment timelines feasible and is the plan to monitor accrual adequate? Has the need for randomization (or not), masking (if appropriate), controls, and inclusion/exclusion criteria been addressed? Are differences addressed, if applicable, in the intervention effect due to sex/gender and race/ethnicity?
Are the plans to standardize, assure quality of, and monitor adherence to, the trial protocol and data collection or distribution guidelines appropriate? Is there a plan to obtain required study agent(s)? Does the application propose to use existing available resources, as applicable?
Data Management and Statistical Analysis
Are planned analyses and statistical approach appropriate for the proposed study design and methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions? Are the procedures for data management and quality control of data adequate at clinical site(s) or at center laboratories, as applicable? Have the methods for standardization of procedures for data management to assess the effect of the intervention and quality control been addressed? Is there a plan to complete data analysis within the proposed period of the award?
If the project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, are the plans to address 1) the protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults), justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
If proposed, are the administrative, data coordinating, enrollment and laboratory/testing centers, appropriate for the trial proposed?
Does the application adequately address the capability and ability to conduct the trial at the proposed site(s) or centers? Are the plans to add or drop enrollment centers, as needed, appropriate?
If international site(s) is/are proposed, does the application adequately address the complexity of executing the clinical trial?
If multi-sites/centers, is there evidence of the ability of the individual site or center to: (1) enroll the proposed numbers; (2) adhere to the protocol; (3) collect and transmit data in an accurate and timely fashion; and, (4) operate within the proposed organizational structure?
Study Timeline
Specific to applications involving clinical trials
Is the study timeline described in detail, taking into account start-up activities, the anticipated rate of enrollment, and planned follow-up assessment? Is the projected timeline feasible and well justified? Does the project incorporate efficiencies and utilize existing resources (e.g., CTSAs, practice-based research networks, electronic medical records, administrative database, or patient registries) to increase the efficiency of participant enrollment and data collection, as appropriate?
Are potential challenges and corresponding solutions discussed (e.g., strategies that can be implemented in the event of enrollment shortfalls)?
For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.
When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults) to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.
The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following criteria: (1) description of proposed procedures involving animals, including species, strains, ages, sex, and total number to be used; (2) justifications for the use of animals versus alternative models and for the appropriateness of the species proposed; (3) interventions to minimize discomfort, distress, pain and injury; and (4) justification for euthanasia method if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. Reviewers will assess the use of chimpanzees as they would any other application proposing the use of vertebrate animals. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section.
Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.
Not Applicable.
Not Applicable.
Not Applicable.
Not Applicable.
Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).
Since the resource sharing plans will be provided in the just-in-time information, reviewers will not comment.
For projects involving key biological and/or chemical resources, reviewers will comment on the brief plans proposed for identifying and ensuring the validity of those resources.
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by the Center for Scientific Review, in accordance with NIH peer review policy and procedures, using the stated review criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA Commons.
Applications will be assigned on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this FOA. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the Council of Councils. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via email to the grantee’s business official.
Awardees must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.5. Funding Restrictions. Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs.
Any application awarded in response to this FOA will be subject to terms and conditions found on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website. This includes any recent legislation and policy applicable to awards that is highlighted on this website.
Individual awards are based on the application submitted to, and as approved by, the NIH and are subject to the IC-specific terms and conditions identified in the NoA.
ClinicalTrials.gov: If an award provides for one or more clinical trials, by law (Title VIII, Section 801 of Public Law 110-85), the "responsible party" must register and submit results information for certain applicable clinical trials on the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System Information Website (https://register.clinicaltrials.gov). NIH expects registration of all trials whether required under the law or not. For more information, see http://grants.nih.gov/ClinicalTrials_fdaaa/.
Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee Approval: Grantee institutions must ensure that all protocols are reviewed by their IRB or IEC. To help ensure the safety of participants enrolled in NIH-funded studies, the awardee must provide NIH copies of documents related to all major changes in the status of ongoing protocols.
Data and Safety Monitoring Requirements: The NIH policy for data and safety monitoring requires oversight and monitoring of all NIH-conducted or -supported human biomedical and behavioral intervention studies (clinical trials) to ensure the safety of participants and the validity and integrity of the data. Further information concerning these requirements is found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/hs/data_safety.htm and in the application instructions (SF424 (R&R) and PHS 398).
Investigational New Drug or Investigational Device Exemption Requirements: Consistent with federal regulations, clinical research projects involving the use of investigational therapeutics, vaccines, or other medical interventions (including licensed products and devices for a purpose other than that for which they were licensed) in humans under a research protocol must be performed under a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigational new drug (IND) or investigational device exemption (IDE).
Recipients of federal financial assistance (FFA) from HHS must administer their programs in compliance with federal civil rights law. This means that recipients of HHS funds must ensure equal access to their programs without regard to a person’s race, color, national origin, disability, age and, in some circumstances, sex and religion. This includes ensuring your programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency. HHS recognizes that research projects are often limited in scope for many reasons that are nondiscriminatory, such as the principal investigator’s scientific interest, funding limitations, recruitment requirements, and other considerations. Thus, criteria in research protocols that target or exclude certain populations are warranted where nondiscriminatory justifications establish that such criteria are appropriate with respect to the health or safety of the subjects, the scientific study design, or the purpose of the research.
In accordance with the statutory provisions contained in Section 872 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), NIH awards will be subject to the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) requirements. FAPIIS requires Federal award making officials to review and consider information about an applicant in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS) prior to making an award. An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through FAPIIS and comment on any information about itself that a Federal agency previously entered and is currently in FAPIIS. The Federal awarding agency will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to other information in FAPIIS, in making a judgement about the applicant’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 45 CFR Part 75.205 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants. This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.
For additional guidance regarding how the provisions apply to NIH grant programs, please contact the Scientific/Research Contact that is identified in Section VII under Agency Contacts of this FOA. HHS provides general guidance to recipients of FFA on meeting their legal obligation to take reasonable steps to provide meaningful access to their programs by persons with limited English proficiency. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/special-topics/limited-english-proficiency/index.html. The HHS Office for Civil Rights also provides guidance on complying with civil rights laws enforced by HHS. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/section-1557/index.htmlhttps://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-providers/laws-regulations-guidance/index.html. Recipients of FFA also have specific legal obligations for serving qualified individuals with disabilities. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/disability/index.html. Please contact the HHS Office for Civil Rights for more information about obligations and prohibitions under federal civil rights laws at https://www.hhs.gov/ocr/about-us/contact-us/index.html or call 1-800-368-1019 or TDD 1-800-537-7697. Also note it is an HHS Departmental goal to ensure access to quality, culturally competent care, including long-term services and supports, for vulnerable populations. For further guidance on providing culturally and linguistically appropriate services, recipients should review the National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health and Health Care at http://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=2&lvlid=53.
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Transparency Act), includes a requirement for awardees of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later. All awardees of applicable NIH grants and cooperative agreements are required to report to the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at www.fsrs.gov on all subawards over $25,000. See the NIH Grants Policy Statement for additional information on this reporting requirement.
In accordance with the regulatory requirements provided at 45 CFR 75.113 and Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75, recipients that have currently active Federal grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from all Federal awarding agencies with a cumulative total value greater than $10,000,000 for any period of time during the period of performance of a Federal award, must report and maintain the currency of information reported in the System for Award Management (SAM) about civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings in connection with the award or performance of a Federal award that reached final disposition within the most recent five-year period. The recipient must also make semiannual disclosures regarding such proceedings. Proceedings information will be made publicly available in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS). This is a statutory requirement under section 872 of Public Law 110-417, as amended (41 U.S.C. 2313). As required by section 3010 of Public Law 111-212, all information posted in the designated integrity and performance system on or after April 15, 2011, except past performance reviews required for Federal procurement contracts, will be publicly available. Full reporting requirements and procedures are found in Appendix XII to 45 CFR Part 75 Award Term and Conditions for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.
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: 301-945-7573
Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Email: [email protected]
Ravi Basavappa, Ph.D.
Office of the Director (OD)
Telephone: 301--435-7204
Email: [email protected]
James Mack, Ph.D.
Center for Scientific Review (CSR)
Telephone: 301-435-2037
Email: [email protected]
Chris Darby
Office of the Director (OD)
Telephone: 301-480-1059
Email: [email protected]