National Institutes of Health (NIH)
NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH (NIH)
This Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) is developed as a Common Fund initiative through the Office of the NIH Director, Office of Strategic Coordination. All NIH Institutes and Centers participate in Common Fund initiatives.
DP1 NIH Directors Pioneer Award (NDPA)
Individuals may serve as the PD/PI on only one application. See Section III. 3. Additional Information on Eligibility.
The NIH Directors Pioneer Award supports individual scientists of exceptional creativity who propose bold and highly innovative research projects with the potential to produce a major impact on broad, important areas relevant to the mission of NIH. To be considered pioneering, the proposed research must reflect substantially different scientific directions from those already being pursued in the investigators research program or elsewhere. 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. The NIH Directors Pioneer Award is a component of the High-Risk, High-Reward Research (HRHR) Program of the NIH Common Fund.
The Office of Strategic Coordination (Common Fund) supports research and other projects that will accelerate fundamental biomedical discovery and translation of that knowledge into effective prevention strategies and new treatments.
Not Applicable
Application Due Dates | Review and Award Cycles | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
New | Renewal / Resubmission / Revision (as allowed) | AIDS - New/Renewal/Resubmission/Revision, as allowed | Scientific Merit Review | Advisory Council Review | Earliest Start Date |
September 09, 2025 | Not Applicable | September 09, 2025 | March 2026 | May 2026 | July 2026 |
All applications are due by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization.
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.
No late applications will be accepted for this Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO).
Not Applicable
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this NOFO or in a Notice from NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts).
Conformance to all requirements (both in the How to Apply - Application Guide and the NOFO) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the How to Apply - Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions.
Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
There are several options available to submit your application through Grants.gov to NIH and Department of Health and Human Services partners. You must use one of these submission options to access the application forms for this opportunity.
The NIH Director's Pioneer Award supports individual scientists of exceptional creativity who propose bold, highly innovative, and broadly impactful research towards the ultimate goal of enhancing human health.
Applications are welcome in all research areas broadly relevant to the mission of NIH. These areas include, but are not limited to, the behavioral, medical, natural, social, applied, and formal sciences. Research may be basic, translational, or clinical. The primary requirements are that the research be highly innovative and have the potential for unusually broad impact.
The Pioneer Award emphasizes the qualities of the investigator and the innovativeness and potential impact of the proposed research. Preliminary data and detailed experimental plans are not requested or required. To be considered pioneering and as an aspect of innovativeness, the proposed research must reflect substantially different ideas from those being pursued in the investigators 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 applicants prior work and expertise as its foundation, it cannot be an obvious extension or scale-up of a current research enterprise. Rather, the proposed project must reflect a fundamental new insight which may involve exceptionally innovative approaches and/or radically unconventional hypotheses. Applications for projects that are straightforward extensions of ongoing research should not be submitted.
Pioneer recipients are required to commit the major portion of their research effort (more than 6 person-months or at least 51%) to activities supported by the Pioneer Award 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. Recipients 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 period 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. Given the scientifically risky nature of the proposed research, award recipients will be given unusual flexibility to pivot their research direction as warranted to maximize scientific impact during the project period.
Investigators who were not selected for an award in prior years may submit applications this year as long as they retain eligibility requirements described in this NOFO; however, all applications must be submitted as new applications regardless of any previous submissions. No reference to any prior application may be included. Any reference to a prior application may be grounds for administrative withdrawal.
Prospective applicants are invited to view a pre-recorded, pre-application webinar on the Pioneer Award website, where NIH staff discuss the initiative and answer common questions about the application and review process. Additional information and resources can be found on the website, and any questions can be sent to [email protected].
The NIH Director's Pioneer Award is part of the High-Risk, High-Reward Research (HRHR) 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.
Investigators proposing NIH-defined clinical trials may refer to the Research Methods Resources website for information about developing statistical methods and study designs.
See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.
Grant: A financial assistance mechanism providing money, property, or both to an eligible entity to carry out an approved project or activity.
The OER Glossary and the How to Apply - Application Guide provide details on these application types. Only those application types listed here are allowed for this NOFO.
Optional: Accepting applications that either propose or do not propose clinical trial(s).
NIH intends to commit approximately $8 million in FY 2026 to fund approximately 8 awards.The number of awards is contingent upon NIH appropriations and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
Awards will be for $700,000 in Direct Costs per year, plus applicable Facilities and Administrative costs (F&A).
The project period is limited to five years.
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made from this NOFO.
Higher Education Institutions - Includes all types
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
For-Profit Organizations
Local Governments
Federal Governments
Other
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Organizations) are not eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed.
Applicant Organizations
Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the How to Apply - 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. Failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission, please reference NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications for additional information
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 their organization to develop an application for support.
Only single PD/PI applications are allowed. Applications with multiple PD(s)/PI(s) will not be accepted.
This NOFO does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 1.2 Definition of Terms.
Number of Applications
Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct. Individuals may submit only one application as a PD/PI in response to this NOFO.
The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time, per NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.7.4 Submission of Resubmission Application. 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 NOFO. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution.
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide except where instructed in this notice of funding opportunity to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the How to Apply - Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
All page limitations described in the How to Apply – Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
The following section supplements the instructions found in the How to Apply – Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this NOFO.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed,
with the following additional instructions:
Agency Routing Identifier (Field 4b): Enter science area designations
Using the list below, designate the two most appropriate scientific areas (a primary and secondary) of the proposal. 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
For each area, enter the primary area first, followed by a semicolon, then add the secondary area (e.g., 1 BSS; 7 NS).
The areas of science listed above are very broad and frequently overlap. Choose the two science areas most appropriate for your proposed project. The scientific areas are used solely as an aid to assign panel reviewers, who are chosen for their breadth of knowledge and expertise and will be able to review a broad range of applications. Science area designations do not affect an applications funding potential, and application requirements and instructions are identical for all science areas. All applications are reviewed in the same time period, with the same review criteria, and compete for a single source of dedicated funds.
Note: The science area designations (two one-digit codes with abbreviation) must also be included at the beginning of the Research Strategy essay.
Type of Application (Field 8): New
Proposed Project (Field 12): Start Date is September 1, 2026, and Ending Date is August 31, 2031
Estimated Project Funding (Field 15):
Note: The total direct costs for the 5-year project period of the award is $3,500,000 and is entered in the "Total Federal Funds Requested" and "Total Federal & Non-Federal Funds" fields (as described above). Applicable Facilities and Administrative costs (F&A) 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 required and will not be accepted. Though the information is not requested in the application, funds may be used for personnel (including collaborators), supplies, equipment, subcontracts, data management and sharing costs, and other allowable costs.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - 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: Only attach Foreign Justification, if applicable.
All instructions in the How to Apply - 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 and include effort in person months 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.
Do not use or submit.
Do not use or submit.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Specific Aims: Do not use.
Research Strategy: The Research Strategy section should be structured as an essay and uploaded as a pdf named Essay.pdf. The essay should contain the following information.
Describe your innovative vision for addressing a major challenge or pursuing an 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? It is recommended to prominently indicate that neither a detailed experimental plan nor extensive preliminary data are being provided per the NOFO. 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 disparate 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 multiple disciplines; and the energy and concentration necessary to plan and execute effective strategies for accomplishing goals.
How the planned research substantially 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 PD's/PI'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 more conventional NIH funding mechanism, such as a new or renewal R01. Rather, a new research direction must reflect a fundamental new insight and may involve 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 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 their research effort to the project supported by the Pioneer Award in the first three years of the award and at least 4 months (33%) research effort and at least 3 months (25%) in years four and five, respectively. 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.
Applicants considering research involving clinical trials are strongly advised to discuss their research ideas with the scientifically most relevant NIH Institutes or Centers (ICs) to ensure that such research would conform to the clinical trial research policies of those ICs. Funding of applications involving clinical trials is contingent upon conformance to the policies of the IC administering the award. For a list of IC staff contacts, see https://commonfund.nih.gov/highrisk/clinical.
Note: References are not required but if included, must fit within the page limit. Figures and illustrations may be included but must also fit within the page limit. Letters of collaboration will not be accepted. Information on collaborators may be included in the Essay and their names and affiliations should be listed in the PHS Assignment Request Form as individuals who should not review your application (see below).
Progress Report Publication List: Do not use.
Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan: Do not use.
Consortium/Contractual Arrangements: Do not use.
Letters of Support: Do not use.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the How to Apply - Application Guide.
Other Plan(s):
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Appendix: Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the How to Apply - Application Guide.
When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials (and when applicable, clinical trials research experience) follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the How to Apply - Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered Yes to the question Are Human Subjects Involved? on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or Delayed Onset Study record.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Delayed Onset Study
Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start). All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following modifications:
Since all applications received in response to this NOFO 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 and institutional affiliations of collaborators in the section for individuals who should not review the application. Also, if you wish to request that certain individuals not review your application, list their names, institutional affiliations, and the reasons why they should not serve as reviewers. NIH will consider this request but is not obligated to accept it.
See Part 2. 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. 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, NIHs 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 Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications.
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 How to Apply – 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 Section 7.9.1 Selected Items of Cost.
Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the How to Apply - 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 form. 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 NOFO for information on registration requirements.
The applicant organization must ensure that the unique entity identifier provided on the application is the same identifier used in the organizations profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Management. Additional information may be found in the How to Apply - 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 the Office of Strategic Coordination (OSC), NIH. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.
Letters of reference are an important part of the Pioneer Award application. PD/PIs 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. PD/PIs are responsible for monitoring the submission of letters in their Commons account to ensure that three letters have been submitted prior to the submission deadline. Referees who submitted letters for Pioneer Award PD/PIs in prior years must submit new letters of reference this year. Previously submitted letters will not be retrieved.
Letters of reference are confidential; PD/PIs will not have access to the letters. PD/PIs should not upload letters of reference on behalf of their referees. Confirmed receipt of letters of reference will be sent via email to both the PD/PI and the referee. The confirmation sent to the PD/PI will include the referees name and the date and time the letter was submitted. The confirmation sent to the referee will include the referee and PD/PI's names, a confirmation number, and the date and time the letter was submitted.
Instructions to Referees
Required Referee Information (the individual providing the letter of reference):
Required PD/PI Information (PD/PI must provide this information to their referees):
Please see the detailed instructions on submitting letters of reference and Frequently Asked Questions on the Pioneer Award website. Send questions to [email protected].
Recipients or subrecipients must submit any information related to violations of federal criminal law involving fraud, bribery, or gratuity violations potentially affecting the federal award. See Mandatory Disclosures, 2 CFR 200.113 and NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 4.1.35.
Send written disclosures to the NIH Chief Grants Management Officer listed on the Notice of Award for the IC that funded the award and to the HHS Office of Inspector Grant Self Disclosure Program at [email protected].
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy
For this NOFO, only documents to inform of unforeseen events, such as natural disasters, that substantially affect the ability to execute the proposed research will be accepted.
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:
Pioneer Award (DP1) applications are meant to support individual scientists of exceptional creativity who propose pioneering -- and possibly transformative -- 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, specific aims, or a detailed research plan. Accordingly, reviewers will emphasize the following:
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 provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project rigorous? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
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 preliminary data, 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?
Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or those in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
With regard to the proposed leadership for the project, do the PD/PI(s) 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?
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, 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?
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, sex, 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 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?
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?
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.
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 inclusion. 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 three points: (1) a complete description of all proposed procedures including the species, strains, ages, sex, and total numbers of animals to be used; (2) justifications that the species is appropriate for the proposed research and why the research goals cannot be accomplished using an alternative non-animal model; and (3) interventions including analgesia, anesthesia, sedation, palliative care, and humane endpoints that will be used to limit any unavoidable discomfort, distress, pain and injury in the conduct of scientifically valuable research. Methods of euthanasia and justification for selected methods, if NOT consistent with the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals, is also required but is found in a separate section of the application. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals Section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animals 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.
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.
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).
Reviewers will comment on whether the Resource Sharing Plan(s) (e.g., Sharing Model Organisms) or the rationale for not sharing the resources, is reasonable.
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 with the modifications as described below, using the stated review criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA Commons.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications will receive a written critique.
Appeals of initial peer review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this NOFO.
Applications will be assigned to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this NOFO. 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:
If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.5.1. Just-in-Time Procedures. This request is not a Notice of Award nor should it be construed to be an indicator of possible funding.
Prior to making an award, NIH reviews an applicants federal award history in SAM.gov to ensure sound business practices. An applicant can review and comment on any information in the Responsibility/Qualification records available in SAM.gov. NIH will consider any comments by the applicant in the Responsibility/Qualification records in SAM.gov to ascertain the applicants integrity, business ethics, and performance record of managing Federal awards per 2 CFR Part 200.206 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants. This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.
PDs/PIs will be notified in April 2026 of the outcome of the first review phase - whether or not they have been selected for an interview; award recipents will be notified by August 2025. Awards will begin in September 2026.
A Notice of Award (NoA) is the official authorizing document notifying the applicant that an award has been made and that funds may be requested from the designated HHS payment system or office. The NoA is signed by the Grants Management Officer and emailed to the recipients business official.
In accepting the award, the recipient agrees that any activities under the award are subject to all provisions currently in effect or implemented during the period of the award, other Department regulations and policies in effect at the time of the award, and applicable statutory provisions.
Recipients must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.6. Funding Restrictions. Any pre-award costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the applicant's own risk. For more information on the Notice of Award, please refer to the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 5. The Notice of Award and NIH Grants & Funding website, see Award Process.
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 and results reporting of all trials whether required under the law or not. For more information, see https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/reporting/index.htm
Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee Approval: Recipient 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 recipient 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).
The following Federal wide and HHS-specific policy requirements apply to awards funded through NIH:
All federal statutes and regulations relevant to federal financial assistance, including those highlighted in NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 4 Public Policy Requirements, Objectives and Other Appropriation Mandates.
Recipients are responsible for ensuring that their activities comply with all applicable federal regulations. NIH may terminate awards under certain circumstances. See 2 CFR Part 200.340 Termination and NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 8.5.2 Remedies for Noncompliance or Enforcement Actions: Suspension, Termination, and Withholding of Support.
Pursuant to the Cybersecurity Act of 2015, Div. N, § 405, Pub. Law 114-113, 6 USC § 1533(d), the HHS Secretary has established a common set of voluntary, consensus-based, and industry-led guidelines, best practices, methodologies, procedures, and processes.
Successful recipients under this NOFO agree that:
When recipients, subrecipients, or third-party entities have:
Recipients shall develop plans and procedures, modeled after the NIST Cybersecurity framework, to protect HHS systems and data. Please refer to NIH Post-Award Monitoring and Reporting for additional information.
Not Applicable
Consistent with the 2023 NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing, when data management and sharing is applicable to the award, recipients will be required to adhere to the Data Management and Sharing requirements as outlined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. Upon the approval of a Data Management and Sharing Plan, it is required for recipients to implement the plan as described.
When multiple years are involved, recipients will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 8.4.1 Reporting. To learn more about post-award monitoring and reporting, see the NIH Grants & Funding website, see Post-Award Monitoring and Reporting.
A final RPPR, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 8.6 Closeout. NIH NOFOs outline intended research goals and objectives. Post award, NIH will review and measure performance based on the details and outcomes that are shared within the RPPR, as described at 2 CFR Part 200.301.
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
eRA Service Desk (Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, and post-submission issues)
Finding Help Online: https://www.era.nih.gov/need-help (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]
Patricia Labosky, Ph.D.
Office of the Director (OD)
Email: [email protected]
Center for Scientific Review (CSR)
Email: [email protected]
Email: [email protected]
Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 2 CFR Part 200.