NCRR SCIENCE EDUCATION PARTNERSHIP AWARD (SEPA) RELEASE DATE: December 19, 2003 RFA: RFA-RR-04-004 This RFA replaces the Science Education Partnership Award, PAR-00-036, published in the NIH Guide December 22, 1999. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) PARTICIPATING ORGANIZATION: National Institutes of Health (NIH) ( COMPONENT OF PARTICIPATING ORGANIZATION: National Center for Research Resources (NCRR/NIH) ( LETTER OF INTENT RECEIPT DATE: January 12, 2004 APPLICATION RECEIPT DATE: February 12, 2004 CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE NUMBER(S) 93.389 THIS RFA CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION o Purpose of this RFA o SEPA Objectives o Mechanism of Support o Eligible Institutions o Individuals Eligible to Become Principal Investigators o Where to Send Inquiries o Submitting an Application o Peer Review Process o Review Criteria o Receipt and Review Schedule o Award Criteria o Required Federal Citations PURPOSE The Science Education Partnership Award (SEPA) Program provides funds for the development, implementation and evaluation of innovative K-12 science education programs, teaching materials and science center/museum programs. SEPA supports partnerships between biomedical, clinical researchers and behavioral scientists with K-12 teachers and schools, museum and science center educators, media experts, and other interested organizations. SEPA’s mission is to foster the development of new programs to improve K-12 and the general public’s understanding of health science advances created by National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded clinical and basic research. Particular importance will be given to SEPA applications that target K-12 educational topics that may not be addressed by existing science curricula or other community and media activities. SEPA OBJECTIVES For NIH to fulfill its mission, i.e., to support the pursuit of fundamental knowledge about the nature and behavior of living systems and the application of that knowledge to extend healthy life and reduce the burdens of illness and disability, adequate numbers of underrepresented minority and underserved students need to enter science education tracks that lead to careers in the biomedical sciences. It is also important to the mission of NIH that health care workers as well as the general public are scientifically literate and have an understanding of the process of biomedical research so that they may better understand and utilize scientific information reported in the media. NCRR is encouraging the submission of grant applications from eligible organizations for science education programs whose scope of activity may include, but are not limited to, the following: o Stimulate the interest of K-12 students in the scientific processes involved in basic and clinical research with innovative, inquiry-based programs whose goal is to increasing the number of students, particularly members of minority and underrepresented groups, who will pursue careers in the biomedical sciences. o Create hands-on activities at science centers and museums that teach inquiry-based thinking about health-related subjects such as brain/behavior, nutrition/exercise/obesity, stem cells/tissue engineering/regenerative medicine, etc. o Develop multi-media outreach programs using lecture series, plays and other audience participation activities. The purpose of these programs should be the education of the general public about the process of basic and clinical research so that they may better understand current advances in health-related research and clinical programs supported by NIH. Proposals for films, television series or other multi-media projects where the direct cost will exceed the $250,000 SEPA limit will no longer be supported by the SEPA program. o Development of traveling exhibits and mobile science laboratories for K-12 students, teachers and parents. o Hands-on laboratory experiences, in both field trip and intern formats, for students in research laboratories. This can be implemented for Phase I, Phase II and Phase I/II proposals. o Develop and evaluate model biomedical and/or behavioral science K-12 education partnership programs between university and clinical center researchers that focus on health-related research. o Develop effective strategies for the dissemination of successful and innovative biomedical and/or behavioral science education. While SEPA projects must represent new activities and focus on health-related science, coordination with existing science education programs, such as those funded by the National Science Foundation, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the Department of Energy, the Department of Education, and others, are encouraged. MECHANISM OF SUPPORT This RFA will use the NIH R25 award mechanism. As an applicant you will be solely responsible for planning, directing, and executing the proposed project. The anticipated award date is August/September 2004. This RFA uses just-in-time concepts. It also uses the non-modular budgeting formats (see Specifically, you should follow the instructions for non-modular budget research grant applications. FUNDS AVAILABLE NCRR intends to commit approximately $3 million in FY 2004 to fund 10 to 15 new grants in response to this RFA. AN APPLICANT MAY REQUEST A BUDGET FOR DIRECT COSTS UP TO $250,000 PER YEAR. Because the nature and scope of the proposed research will vary from application to application, it is anticipated that the size and duration of each award will also vary. Applicants may choose to submit: (1) a Development (Phase I) application, (2) a Dissemination (Phase II) application or (3) a combined Development and Dissemination (Phase I/Phase II) application. Phase I proposals are three year awards, Phase II proposals are two year awards and Phase I/Phase II are five year awards. Combined Phase I and Phase II applications are recommended for ongoing science education programs or for science museums and technology centers Grant funds may be requested for direct costs that are clearly related and necessary to conduct the proposed research plan. Allowable Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs will be reimbursed at eight percent of total allowable direct cost base. The applicant will be solely responsible for the planning, direction, and execution of their SEPA program. Although the financial plans of the NCRR to provide support for this program, awards pursuant to this RFA are contingent upon the availability of funds and the receipt of a sufficient number of meritorious applications. Programmatic considerations for awards will include diversity of programs in the SEPA portfolio and geographic distribution. Conditions of Award All publications, web sites, audiovisual materials and other products resulting from SEPA activities supported entirely or in substantial part by the NCRR / NIH should include the following or comparable acknowledgement of support: "This project was supported by a Science Education Partnership Award (SEPA) from the National Center For Research Resources, National Institutes of Health. Its content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of NCRR or NIH". ELIGIBLE INSTITUTIONS You may submit an application if your institution has any of the following characteristics: o For-profit or non-profit organizations o Public or private institutions, such as universities, colleges, hospitals, and laboratories o Units of State and local governments o Eligible agencies of the Federal government o Domestic organizations/organizations o Faith-based or community-based organizations o Foreign institutions are not eligible to apply INDIVIDUALS ELIGIBLE TO BECOME PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS Any individual with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research is invited to work with their institution and their K-12 partners to submit a SEPA application. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are encouraged to apply. WHERE TO SEND INQUIRIES We encourage inquiries concerning this RFA and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants. Inquiries may fall into three areas: scientific/research, peer review, and financial or grants management issues. NCRR SEPA Program staff encourages potential applicants to contact them to discuss potential SEPA projects, scientific content, grant application issues or other questions related to the SEPA program. o Direct your questions about scientific issues to: L. Tony Beck, Ph.D. Program Officer, SEPA Division of Clinical Research Resources National Center for Research Resources 6701 Democracy Boulevard Room 916 MSC 4874 Bethesda, Maryland 20892-7965 (20817 Zip Code for courier deliveries) Telephone: (301) 435-0805 FAX: (301) 480-3661 Email: o Direct your questions about peer review issues to: Sheryl K. Brining, Ph.D. Director, Office of Review National Center for Research Resources 6701 Democracy Blvd., MSC 4874 Bethesda, MD 20892-4874 Telephone: (301) 435-0806 Fax: (301) 480-3660 E-Mail: o Direct your questions about grants management issue to: Ms. Leslie Le Office of Grants and Contracts Management National Center for Research Resources 6701 Democracy Boulevard Room 1058 MSC 4874 Bethesda, MD 20892-7965 (20817 Zip Code for courier deliveries) Telephone: (301) 435-0856 FAX: (301) 480-3777 Email: LETTER OF INTENT Prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information: o Descriptive title of the proposed research o Name, address, and telephone number of the Principal Investigator o Names of other key personnel o Participating institutions o Number and title of this RFA Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information that it contains allows NCRR staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review. The letter of intent is to be sent by the date listed at the beginning of this document. The letter of intent should be sent to: L. Tony Beck, Ph.D. Program Officer, SEPA Division of Clinical Research Resources National Center for Research Resources 6701 Democracy Boulevard Room 916 MSC 4874 Bethesda, Maryland 20892-7965 (20817 Zip Code for courier deliveries) Telephone: (301) 435-0805 FAX: (301) 480-3661 Email: SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION Applications must be prepared using the PHS 398 research grant application instructions and forms (rev. 5/2001). Applications must have a DUN and Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number as the Universal Identifier when applying for Federal grants or cooperative agreements. The DUNS number can be obtained by calling (866) 705-5711 or through the web site at The DUNS number should be entered on line 11 of the face page of the PHS 398 form. The PHS 398 document is available at in an interactive format. For further assistance contact GrantsInfo, Telephone (301) 710-0267, Email: SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS: o Face Page Item 1, Title: Indicate whether this is a Phase I, a Phase II or a combination Phase I/II application. Item 2, Response: Check "YES" and identify the number and title of this RFA. Item 4, Human Subjects Research: Check YES. SEPA programs involve human subjects for which an Exemption or Human Subject Assurance must be provided. See the REQUIRED FEDERAL CITATIONS section at the end of this RFA for guidelines or contact the SEPA Program Officer for assistance. Item 5, Vertebrate Animals: Check YES or NO as appropriate. See the REQUIRED FEDERAL CITATIONS section at the end of this RFA for guidelines or contact the SEPA Program Officer for assistance. Item 6. The project period begin date should be the anticipated award date (i.e., July 1 or later). The length of the project period may not exceed three years for applications requesting separate support for Phase I proposals and two years for Phase II proposals. Applications that request support for both Phase I and II may request support for up to five years. o Appendix Material: Information essential for the review of the application should not be included in the Appendix section. Appendix materials submitted with the application must adhere to the PHS 398 requirements. o Summer Interns: If the didactic materials are targeted to high school students, both Phase I and Phase II applications may include a summer research experience component for high school students. In these instances, the applicant must provide the names and competencies of the selection committee, a description of the intern selection process and a summary of the research experiences that students will be provided. o Exemptions: NIH defines human subjects research as the study of living persons with whom an investigator directly interacts, intervenes, or obtains identifiable, private information. If you are claiming a human subjects exemption in Item 4 on the face page you must justify it in the human subjects section (Research Plan, E. Human Subjects in the Table of Contents) of your research plan. See the REQUIRED FEDERAL CITATIONS section at the end of this RFA for guidelines or contact the SEPA Program Officer for assistance. o Inclusion: The adequacy of plans to include subjects from both genders, all racial and ethnic groups (and subgroups), and children as appropriate for the scientific goals of the research. If applicable, you must justify your selection of specific racial and ethnic groups for the proposed SEPA project in the human subjects section of your research plan. (See Inclusion Criteria included in the section on Federal Citations, below you must justify it in the human subjects section or contact the SEPA Program Officer for assistance. USING THE RFA LABEL: The RFA label available in the PHS 398 (rev. 5/2001) application form must be affixed to the bottom of the face page of the application. Type the RFA number on the label. Failure to use this label could result in delayed processing of the application such that it may not reach the review committee in time for review. In addition, the RFA title and number must be typed on line 2 of the face page of the application form and the YES box must be marked. The RFA label is also available at: SENDING AN APPLICATION TO THE NIH: Submit a signed, typewritten original of the application, including the Checklist, and three signed, photocopies, in one package to: Center For Scientific Review National Institutes Of Health 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 1040, MSC 7710 Bethesda, MD 20892-7710 Bethesda, MD 20817 (for express/courier service) At the time of submission, two additional copies of the application and all copies of the Appendix materials must be sent to: Sheryl K. Brining, Ph.D. Director, Office of Review ATTN: SEPA National Center for Research Resources 6701 Democracy Blvd., MSC 4874 Bethesda, MD 20892-4874 APPLICATION PROCESSING: Applications must be received on or before the application receipt date listed in the heading of this RFA. If an application is received after that date, it will be returned to the applicant without review. Although there is no immediate acknowledgement of the receipt of an application, applicants are generally notified of the review and funding assignment within 8 weeks. The Center for Scientific Review (CSR) will not accept any application in response to this RFA that is essentially the same as one currently pending initial review, unless the applicant withdraws the pending application. However, when a previously unfunded application, originally submitted as a SEPA RFA, is to be submitted in response to a new SEPA RFA, it should be prepared as an amended application. That is, the application for the RFA must include an Introduction describing the changes and improvements made, and the text must be marked to indicate the changes from the previous unfunded version of the application. APPLICATION RECEIPT DATE: Applications must be received by February 12, 2004. If an application is received after that date, it will be returned to the applicant without review. PEER REVIEW PROCESS Upon receipt, applications will be reviewed for completeness by the CSR and responsiveness by the NCRR. Incomplete applications will not be reviewed. If the application is not responsive to the RFA, NIH staff will return the application to the applicant. Applications that are complete and responsive to the RFA will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate peer review group convened by NCRR in accordance with the review criteria stated below. As part of the initial merit review, all applications will: o Undergo a process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific merit, generally the top half of the applications under review, will be discussed and assigned a priority score o Receive a written critique o Receive a second level review by the NCRR National Advisory Council. REVIEW CRITERIA The goals of NIH-supported SEPA projects are to enhance the exposure and understanding of K-12 students, their teachers and families as well as the general public to basic and clinical research. It is the intent of the SEPA program to increase the number of underrepresented minority and underserved students who will pursue biomedical careers. In the written comments, reviewers will be asked to evaluate the application in order to judge the likelihood that the proposed research will have a substantial impact on the pursuit of these goals. The scientific review group will address and consider each of the following criteria in assigning the application’s overall score, weighting them as appropriate for each application. o Significance o Approach o Evaluation o Outreach o Innovation o Personnel o Environment The application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact and thus deserve a high priority score. For example, an investigator may propose to carry out important work that by its nature is not innovative but is essential to move a field forward. Except as noted below, the following guidelines are applicable to both Phase I and Phase II applications. In general, the research plan should be structured to provide information sufficient to allow the reviewers to assess the project in terms of the review criteria stated below. SEPA encourages applicants to target K-12 topics that may not be addressed in existing science curricula or by other community and media activities. NOTE: There are two separate sets of review criteria; one for plans to develop new SEPA models (Phase I), another for Phase I/II SEPA proposals, Phase II SEPA projects or for dissemination of SEPA-type models that have already been developed SIGNIFICANCE: Does this study address an important problem? If the aims of the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge be advanced? What will be the effect of these studies on the concepts or methods that drive this field? (Phase I and Phase II applications): o Briefly summarize the background leading to the development of this plan. Explain why the particular strategy was chosen. Include information on the process and rationale for selecting the scientific area, the educational approach, and the target population, and indicate how this project will address an unmet need. o The proposed program should address the objectives stated in this RFA and should reach a broad population, particularly minority and underrepresented groups. o Describe the advantages and limitations of the model selected, and its potential for widespread dissemination and adaptability for use by others. APPROACH: Are the conceptual framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well-integrated, and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES (Phase I and Phase II applications): Identify the long- range goals for the project and describe the specific objectives for the proposed project period. PRELIMINARY STUDIES (Phase I applications only): For Phase I (model development), include preliminary studies relevant to your application conducted by the principal investigator and/or other key personnel. Also provide other relevant information that will establish the experience and competence of both the program leadership staff and partnership organizations to effectively carry out the proposed project. PROGRESS REPORT (Phase II applications only): For Phase II (dissemination) applications, provide a detailed progress report of achievements with the existing pilot model, including: o A description of the educational approach, the scientific content, and the nature and extent of existing educational and scientific partnerships and collaborative interactions. o A detailed description of the educational material produced. Identify the actual materials as "Exhibits" and include in the application. Do not label these materials as appendices. Some examples of exhibit items are: print materials (newsletters, booklets), videos, diskettes, and other computer software. Limit exhibits to items that are readily portable and to materials considered to be essential to review. o A description of the evaluation process. Summarize the results of this process. Include the evaluation instruments in the appendix. o A summary of the impact of the current Phase I SEPA project to date. Include numbers of students, teachers and/or the public impacted by this approach, and other relevant outreach accomplishments. o A description of any dissemination activities to date, or a description of the stage of development of the current model with respect to future dissemination plans. PROPOSED PLAN (Phase I and Phase II applications): o Describe in detail the activities proposed and how they will contribute to achieving the stated goals of the program. o Give quantitative data on the numbers of teachers, students, and/or members of the general public projected to be involved and the quantity and types of educational materials to be produced and/or disseminated. o Explain the relevance and potential of this project for dissemination to a broad population, including efforts aimed at underrepresented groups in science, both women and minorities. o Explain clearly the nature and extent of educational and scientific partnerships and collaborations to be developed (or, for those already established, any plans for expansion or modification), and the roles of key participants in the planning and conduct of the project. o Provide documentation of the interest and commitment of partnership members to this project. o Discuss how the proposed educational programs or research project appropriate and adequate to achieve the educational goals outlined. o Discuss how the research plan proposes to develop both the science education module as well as the methodology to present the module. o If the didactic materials are targeted to high school students, both Phase I and II applications may include a summer research experience component for high school students. In these instances, the applicant must: provide the names and competencies of the selection committee; describe the selection process, including the selection criteria; and provide 3-4 examples of the research experiences that students will be provided. o Describe the administrative plan to organize and manage the overall project, and provide a timetable for the various tasks and activities for the entire project period requested. EVALUATION: All applications must include a detailed Evaluation Plan for assessing the success of the proposed SEPA program. TEN PERCENT (10%) OF THE DIRECT COST BUDGET REQUESTED SHOULD BE DEVOTED TO PROJECT EVALUATION. The Evaluation Plan should be an integral component of the early planning stages and must continue through the life of the SEPA program. The use of external evaluators is required unless a valid justification can be made for an internal evaluation team. o Provide a detailed plan for evaluating the effectiveness of the program in achieving its objectives. o Document that the evaluation team is appropriate and qualified for your type of SEPA project. o Describe the development and implementation of the plan for formative and summative evaluations of project activities. Include strategies for revisions to evaluative instruments and educational processes and/or materials. OUTREACH: Science centers and museums are encouraged to develop field trip programs for minority and underserved K-12 students and teachers as well as public outreach activities that will engage and educate the museum community as well as the general public on current health related topics as reported in the popular press. INNOVATION: Does the project employ novel concepts, approaches or methods? Are the aims original and innovative? Does the project challenge existing paradigms or develop new methodologies or technologies? o Discuss how the curriculum, educational, research and/or collaborative plans include original and unique approaches for addressing the needs put forth in the goals and objectives. o Present your plan to include related learning tools, such as teamwork, writing and mathematics skills, inquiry-based thinking and problem solving under the umbrella of your main science education topic. If appropriate discuss your plans to challenge existing science education paradigms or to develop new approaches for improving science literacy. INVESTIGATOR: Is the investigator appropriately trained and well suited to carry out this work? Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal investigator and other researchers (if any)? o Present a discussion as to how the program leadership has demonstrated a record of achievements and that their qualifications are appropriate to achieving the proposed goals and implementing the stated plan. o Discuss how the K-12 partners will provide input in the proposed program with respect to educational content, sophistication level of the students and relevance to state and national testing standards. As appropriate letters of participation and support from collaborators, school officials and teachers must be included as Appendix materials. ENVIRONMENT: Does the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Do the proposed experiments take advantage of unique features of the scientific environment or employ useful collaborative arrangements? Is there evidence of institutional support? o Discuss how the inquiry-based scientific and educational environment described in your proposal will foster student interest and participation, increase the awareness of the scientific process and ultimately generate a high level of confidence in the students for health science related careers. o Describe the institutional commitment to the project in terms of support for the SEPA project, adequate space, and classroom time. If your proposal includes teacher training workshops, support for teacher release time should be provided. ADDITIONAL REVIEW CRITERIA: In addition to the above criteria, the following items will be considered in the determination of scientific merit and the priority score: SUSTAINABILITY (Phase I/II and Phase II proposals only): You must provide a detailed plan for sustaining your SEPA program, either through institutionalization or other funding sources, after the funding period ends. Programmatic emphasis is placed on those SEPA proposals with well-developed implementation plans for long term continuation of the proposed program SHARING OF TEACHING MODULE AND EVALUATION DATA: Provide a plan for sharing the methods, teaching materials and evaluation data generated as a result of your SEPA proposal. PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS FROM RESEARCH RISK: The involvement of human subjects and protections from research risk relating to their participation in the proposed research will be assessed. (See criteria included in the section on Federal Citations, below). INCLUSION OF WOMEN, MINORITIES AND CHILDREN IN RESEARCH: The adequacy of plans to include subjects from both genders, all racial and ethnic groups (and subgroups), and children as appropriate for the scientific goals of the research. Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects will also be evaluated. (See Inclusion Criteria in the sections on Federal Citations, below). CARE AND USE OF VERTEBRATE ANIMALS IN RESEARCH: If vertebrate animals are to be used in the project, the five items described under Section f of the PHS 398 research grant application instructions (rev. 5/2001) will be assessed. BUDGET: The reasonableness of the proposed budget and the requested period of support in relation to the proposed research. ANNUAL MEETING: An annual SEPA Principal Investigator Meeting will be convened to foster collaboration, discuss newly emerging national strategies, coordinate dissemination, share evaluation methodologies and outcomes, and minimize duplication of efforts. Travel funds for these activities should be included in the budget request for each year, and a statement regarding willingness to participate in these activities should be included in the application. RECEIPT AND REVIEW SCHEDULE Letter of Intent Receipt Date: January 12, 2004 Peer Review Date: May June, 2004 Council Review: September 2004 Earliest Start Date: September 2004 AWARD CRITERIA Applications will compete for available funds with other recommended applications. Award criteria that will be used to make award decisions include: o Scientific merit as determined by peer review o Responsiveness to this RFA o Programmatic priorities o Availability of funds REQUIRED FEDERAL CITATIONS HUMAN SUBJECTS PROTECTION: Federal regulations (45CFR46) require that applications and proposals involving human subjects must be evaluated with reference to the risks to the subjects, the adequacy of protection against these risks, the potential benefits of the research to the subjects and others, and the importance of the knowledge gained or to be gained. INCLUSION OF WOMEN AND MINORITIES IN CLINICAL RESEARCH: It is the policy of the NIH that women and members of minority groups and their sub-populations must be included in all NIH-supported clinical research projects unless a clear and compelling justification is provided indicating that inclusion is inappropriate with respect to the health of the subjects or the purpose of the research. This policy results from the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 (Section 492B of Public Law 103-43). All investigators proposing clinical research should read the "NIH Guidelines for Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical Research - Amended, October, 2001," published in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts on October 9, 2001 (; a complete copy of the updated Guidelines are available at The amended policy incorporates: the use of an NIH definition of clinical research; updated racial and ethnic categories in compliance with the new OMB standards; clarification of language governing NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials consistent with the new PHS Form 398; and updated roles and responsibilities of NIH staff and the extramural community. The policy continues to require for all NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials that: a) all applications or proposals and/or protocols must provide a description of plans to conduct analyses, as appropriate, to address differences by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic groups, including subgroups if applicable; and b) investigators must report annual accrual and progress in conducting analyses, as appropriate, by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic group differences. INCLUSION OF CHILDREN AS PARTICIPANTS IN RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS: The NIH maintains a policy that children (i.e., individuals under the age of 21) must be included in all human subjects research, conducted or supported by the NIH, unless there are scientific and ethical reasons not to include them. This policy applies to all initial (Type 1) applications submitted for receipt dates after October 1, 1998. All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the "NIH Policy and Guidelines" on the inclusion of children as participants in research involving human subjects that is available at REQUIRED EDUCATION ON THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECT PARTICIPANTS: NIH policy requires education on the protection of human subject participants for all investigators submitting NIH proposals for research involving human subjects. You will find this policy announcement in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts Announcement, dated June 5, 2000, at PUBLIC ACCESS TO RESEARCH DATA THROUGH THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110 has been revised to provide public access to research data through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) under some circumstances. Data that are (1) first produced in a project that is supported in whole or in part with Federal funds and (2) cited publicly and officially by a Federal agency in support of an action that has the force and effect of law (i.e., a regulation) may be accessed through FOIA. It is important for applicants to understand the basic scope of this amendment. NIH has provided guidance at Applicants may wish to place data collected under this PA in a public archive, which can provide protections for the data and manage the distribution for an indefinite period of time. If so, the application should include a description of the archiving plan in the study design and include information about this in the budget justification section of the application. In addition, applicants should think about how to structure informed consent statements and other human subjects procedures given the potential for wider use of data collected under this award. URLs IN NIH GRANT APPLICATIONS OR APPENDICES: All applications and proposals for NIH funding must be self-contained within specified page limitations. Unless otherwise specified in an NIH solicitation, Internet addresses (URLs) should not be used to provide information necessary to the review because reviewers are under no obligation to view the Internet sites. Furthermore, we caution reviewers that their anonymity may be compromised when they directly access an Internet site. HEALTHY PEOPLE 2010: The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving the health promotion and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2010," a PHS-led national activity for setting priority areas. This RFA is related to one or more of the priority areas. Potential applicants may obtain a copy of "Healthy People 2010" at AUTHORITY AND REGULATIONS: This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance at and is not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health Systems Agency review. Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284)and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. The NIH Grants Policy Statement can be found at The PHS strongly encourages all grant recipients to provide a smoke-free workplace and discourage the use of all tobacco products. In addition, Public Law 103-227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking in certain facilities (or in some cases, any portion of a facility) in which regular or routine education, library, day care, health care, or early childhood development services are provided to children. This is consistent with the PHS mission to protect and advance the physical and mental health of the American people.

Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices

NIH Office of Extramural Research Logo
  Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) - Home Page Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS) - Government Made Easy
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health®

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