Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
and Human Services (HHS)
EXPIRED
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS)
New
None
93.350
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) invites researchers to submit applications for multidisciplinary diagnostic strategies for rare diseases that combine machine-assistance, genomic analysis, and clinical consultation. Of particular importance, these strategies must be able to be adopted and performed at the primary or secondary care levels by front-line healthcare providers and be readily integrated into their clinical care workflow.
30 days prior to the application due date
November 12, 2020
All applications are due by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. All types of non-AIDS applications allowed for this funding opportunity announcement are due on the listed date(s).
Applicants are encouraged to apply early to allow adequate time to make any corrections to errors found in the application during the submission process by the due date.
Not Applicable.
January 2021
May 2021
July 2021
Not Applicable
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide,except where instructed to do otherwise (in this FOA or in a Notice from NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts ).
Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions.
Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
Purpose
Most rare disease patients experience years-long delays and often need to consult with multiple physicians and specialists before obtaining a correct diagnosis. This diagnostic delay is so pervasive in rare diseases that it is termed the diagnostic odyssey. Delays in obtaining a correct diagnosis lead to several problems for rare disease patients, such as undergoing redundant testing and procedures, misdiagnosis which may lead to inappropriate treatment, and importantly, substantial delays in obtaining disease-appropriate management and treatment, and when available, disease-modifying therapies. For many diseases, such as neurodegenerative disorders, delays in diagnosis can result in irreversible disease progression, and in some cases, the time window for intervention can be passed leading to unrelenting progression of the disease.
This FOA invites researchers to submit applications for support of clinical projects that address the critical need for timely identification and accurate diagnosis of rare disease patients. The Office of Rare Diseases Research (ORDR) within the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) [along with the Institutes and Centers (ICs) listed in Part 1 at the National Institutes of Health (NIH)] intends to facilitate rare diseases research by enabling more rapid identification and diagnosis of patients, who may then be eligible for targeted interventions, research protocols (including clinical trials, natural history studies and registries, and epidemiologic studies), or disease-appropriate care and evaluation of their disease. Applications are being sought that propose diagnostic strategies that incorporate clinical consultation, machine-assistance and genomic analyses that could provide more rapid identification, escalation, and accurate diagnosis of hard-to-diagnose patients, and that could be readily integrated into front-line clinical care.
Background
There are an estimated 7,000 different rare diseases, most of which (~85%) are monogenic disorders, many of which are very low prevalence disorders (<3,500, or fewer, patients in the US), and most have considerable within-disease phenotypic heterogeneity. Given the low prevalence, most front-line clinicians may have no prior experience with the individual diseases, which contributes to the difficulty in diagnosis, and often requires specialist, sub-specialist or multi-disciplinary referral to accurately diagnose the patient.
Current diagnostic approaches for hard-to-diagnose patients, many of which have rare diseases, are typically made through idiosyncratic specialist and sub-specialist referrals, often located at tertiary care and/or academic institutions. Specialists and sub-specialists are a scarce resource that may result in substantial time delays in obtaining appointments, and for some patients, may require travel of long distances for evaluation. Because rare disease and hard-to-diagnose patients often require multiple specialist referrals, and typically multiple tests and procedures, there can be substantial time delays in obtaining a diagnosis.
Genomic analyses are not routinely performed in clinical practice. In recent years, genomic testing has become more available, and for more commonly encountered conditions, a diagnosis may be readily made in the appropriate context. However, interpretation of genomic analyses for rare monogenic diseases is difficult, and often requires subspecialty evaluation and genetic counseling referral. These are also scare resources contributing to diagnostic delays.
Additionally, knowledge accumulation in rare genetic diseases is rapidly advancing; clinicians need access to accurate and up-to-date information that is readily available, and able to be integrated into clinical practice to facilitate rare disease recognition. The volume of this information is nearly impossible for clinicians to manage and machine-assistance to facilitate decision support has been recommended as an area of interest and development; however, currently most decision support is focused on common disease approaches, such as cardiovascular disease algorithms, and safety warnings for drug prescribing and interactions. Rare disease tools are being developed, but most are stand-alone programs that require clinician awareness, often require substantial data entry or training to use, and are not integrated into usual care. Similarly, voluminous information is available in healthcare system databases and electronic medical records (EMR), but the management of this information to facilitate diagnosis is challenging.
Thus, developing better diagnostic strategies that could incorporate clinical, machine-assisted and genomic analyses that could be readily integrated into front-line clinical care is likely to provide more rapid identification, escalation, and accurate diagnosis of hard-to-diagnose patients.
Clinical approaches for these projects may include multidisciplinary expert diagnostic teams, comprised of, for example, clinical specialists, informatics experts, geneticists, and other subject matter experts, who would work collaboratively to diagnose patients referred by primary care physicians, or the development of frameworks through which primary care providers can escalate a suspected rare disease patient to a multidisciplinary diagnostic team.
Artificial intelligence, including machine learning or other information technology (IT) (collectively referred to as machine-assistance ), components of the project may include the development of algorithms that computationally make predictions based on data. Machine assistance strategies may be applied to the EMR or other healthcare system databases, genomic data, imaging data, and other biological domains. Methods may include knowledge extraction, such as natural language processing; or machine capture and interpretation, such as facial recognition. The goal would be to develop and apply algorithms that could identify potential rare disease patients on the basis of, for example: medical utilization patterns such as high-utilizers, young age; sentinel characteristics or other features (e.g., abnormal gait, facial features, delayed development);imprecise diagnosis (e.g., neurologic disorder not otherwise specified, failure to thrive) or based on clusters of diseases that are related in some way, such as generalized seizures or motor impairment.
Research Objectives and Scope
The objective of this FOA is to promote the planning and development of multi-disciplinary rare disease diagnostic strategies that will rapidly identify and escalate hard-to-diagnose or undiagnosed patients, and that must be applicable to a broad array of rare diseases. Diagnostic strategies must integrate machine-assistance strategies, rapid genomic analysis or interpretation of a laboratory testing panel, and clinical consultation within the project. Importantly, these strategies must be able to be adopted and performed at the primary or secondary care levels by front-line healthcare providers, and must be readily integrated into their clinical care workflow.
Examples of approaches that could be incorporated into a diagnostic strategy supported through this FOA include, but are not limited to, those listed below. The overall approach must include one strategy each for clinical, genomic analyses and machine-assistance.
The following approaches will be considered non-responsive to this FOA and will result in the application being withdrawn prior to review:
This FOA will use the UG3/UH3 Cooperative Agreement mechanism. This funding mechanism involves two Phases. During the UG3 Phase (3 years), support will be provided to develop an innovative diagnostic strategy and pilot test the strategy at a single primary care setting. If successful, the UH3 period (2 years) will support the feasibility of disseminating the diagnostic strategy into at least one other clinical setting.
The UG3 Phase:
The primary focus of the UG3 phase should be on planning and developing a diagnostic process for rare diseases, and pilot testing of critical experimental parameters in a single primary care setting. The evaluation of this pilot testing should include quantifiable outcome measures.
Transition to the UH3 Phase:
Delineation of milestones is a key characteristic of this FOA. The application is expected to propose a well-defined set of milestones for the UG3 phase as well as the UH3 phase. A milestone is defined as a scheduled event in the project timeline that signifies the completion of a major project stage or activity. Milestones must be performance-based to enhance the likelihood that the project will be completed on-time and on-budget. It is understood that the proposed milestones for the UH3 phase may be revised as activities in the UG3 phase progress. In the event of an award, the PD/PI and NCATS staff will negotiate the final list of milestones for each year of support. Satisfactory completion of UG3 milestones will be assessed administratively to determine eligibility to transition to the UH3 implementation phase. The quality of the planning, design, and documentation products for the UH3 phase will be given key consideration when the NCATS considers the transition to the UH3 implementation phase. If at any time the project fails to make progress toward meeting milestones (e.g., developing a final protocol and/or manual of procedures including a detailed description of study procedures and process details, etc.), the NCATS may consider ending support and negotiating an orderly close-out of the award.Applicants and recipients of UG3 funding should note that the UG3 award does not guarantee subsequent UH3 funding. An administrative review of the extent to which peer-reviewed milestones are met in the UG3 phase will determine whether the UH3 phase award will be issued, subject to NCATS funding availability.
The criteria to determine whether a UG3 project will be continued into the UH3 Phase will be negotiated between the NIH and applicant prior to funding. The UG3 phase must include milestone-driven work to determine if the planning period is justified. Projects should have clear, testable components for each of the 3 required areas (clinical, genomic analysis, machine-assistance) and the research plan should use quantifiable measures for making a go/no-go decision to progress to clinical testing. Funding of the UH3 award will be determined by successful completion of UG3 scientific milestones as determined by the NIH.
The UH3 Phase:
The major goals of the UH3 phase are to disseminate the diagnostic strategy into at least one other clinical care setting and identify and overcome challenges to doing so. Ideally, this would include clinical care settings which reflect health disparities, and which differ with regard to demographic, geographic (e.g., rural versus urban), and socioeconomic factors.
Prior Consultation:
Applicants are strongly encouraged to consult with NCATS Scientific and Program Staff early on during the planning for an application. This early contact will provide an opportunity to discuss and clarify NIH policies and guidelines, including the scope of project relative to the intent of this FOA.
See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.
Cooperative Agreement: A support mechanism used when there will be substantial Federal scientific or programmatic involvement. Substantial involvement means that, after award, NIH scientific or program staff will assist, guide, coordinate, or participate in project activities. See Section VI.2 for additional information about the substantial involvement for this FOA.
The OER Glossary and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on these application types. Only those application types listed here are allowed for this FOA.
Need help determining whether you are doing a clinical trial?
NCATS intends to commit $1,000,000 per year FY2021-2026 to fund up to 4 awards.
Direct cost funding support may not exceed $125,000 per year for the UG3 phase of awards and $250,000 per year for the UH3 phase awards.
The scope of the proposed project should determine the project period.
The project period may not exceed 3 years for the UG3 phase.
The project period may not exceed 2 years for the UH3 phase.
The maximum project period for the entire UG3/UH3 award is 5 years.
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made from this FOA.
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
Local Governments
Federal Governments
Other
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are not eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed.
Applicant organizations
Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as possible. The NIH Policy on Late Submission of Grant Applications states that failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission.
Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))
All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account. PD(s)/PI(s) should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate their existing account with the applicant organization in eRA Commons. If the PD/PI is also the organizational Signing Official, they must have two distinct eRA Commons accounts, one for each role. Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.
Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with his/her organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for NIH support.
For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
In view of the goals of this FOA, applicants should assemble a multi-disciplinary team with expertise in medical informatics, genetic analysis, rare diseases, and primary care when preparing the application.
This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct.
The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time. 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.
Letter of Intent
Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information that it contains allows IC staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review.
By the date listed in Part 1. Overview Information, prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:
The letter of intent should be sent to:
Carol Lambert, PhD
National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS)
Telephone: 301-435-0814
Email: [email protected]
All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
The following section supplements the instructions found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this FOA.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
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 additional instructions:
Specific Aims:Provide the overall goals or hypotheses for the entire project period and identify separate Specific Aims to be accomplished in the UG3 phase and in the UH3 phase.
Research Strategy:
Transition Milestones for transition from the UG3 Phase to the UH3 Phase
The milestones and timeline for each stage must be provided in a separate heading at the end of the approach section for the UG3 and the UH3 component and include the following:
Identify any impediments that could require an addendum to the research plan, milestones, or timeline with a discussion of alternative approaches.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
The following modifications also apply:
Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) 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 SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered Yes to the question Are Human Subjects Involved? on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or Delayed Onset Study record.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.
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.
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.
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy. Any instructions provided here are in addition to the instructions in the policy.
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. Applications submitted to the NIH in support of the NIH mission are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.
For this particular announcement, note the following: The UG3/UH3 cooperative agreement provides support for a bi-phasic approach to funding innovative exploratory and developmental research. It provides support for the first phase of the award. Only UG3 projects that meet the scientific milestones and feasibility requirements may transition to the UH3 phase.
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.
Significance
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?
Specific to this FOA:
To what extent will the outcomes of the proposed diagnostic strategy represent a substantial advance over available approaches for hard-to-diagnosis patients? How will successful completion of the aims change the methods for adoption of coordinated diagnostic strategies into clinical practice for suspected rare disease patients across the rare disease field?
Investigator(s)
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?
Specific to this FOA:
How strong is the rare disease, genomics, informatics and primary care research expertise of the PD(s)/PI(s) and Key Personnel involved in the multi-disciplinary diagnostic approach? Is there strong evidence that the PD/PI has experience leading a multi-disciplinary team and managing administrative functions? Is the Multi-PI leadership plan, if applicable, well-described, including plans for dispute resolution? Have project leadership and other key personnel demonstrated a record of directing research activities related to creating and validating the individual components of the diagnostic strategy within their areas of expertise?
Innovation
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?
Specific to this FOA:
How strong is the justification/rationale provided that the diagnostic strategy is applicable to a broad array of rare diseases? How strong is the justification/rationale provided that the diagnostic strategy seeks to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing multi-disciplinary and coordinated approaches to rare disease diagnosis, including machine-assistance, genomics/laboratory panel analyses and clinical consultation?
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?
Specific to this FOA:
How strong is the justification/rationale that the plan to develop and integrate a machine-learning tool into the diagnostic strategy will result in an improvement in rare disease diagnosis? To what extent will genomic/laboratory panel analyses contribute to an improvement in rare disease diagnosis? How strong is the justification/rationale that the plan to integrate the proposed diagnostic strategy into clinical practice is clear and feasible? To what extent will the measurement tools for assessing healthcare provider uptake and acceptance into clinical care provide interpretable information? For the UH3 phase, how strong is the justification/rationale that the plan for initiating the proposed diagnostic strategy at more than one clinical site is clear and feasible?
Milestones: Are appropriate, clearly-defined quantitative milestones provided for the UG3 and UH3 phases of the overall project? Are the UG3 and UH3 milestones feasible, well developed and quantitative with regard to the specific aims within each phase? Is the overall timeline feasible for the UG3 and UH3 phases? Are adequate criteria provided in the UG3 phase to assess milestone completion in order to make a decision to advance studies to the UH3 phase?
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?
Environment
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?
Specific to this FOA:
To what extent does the UG3 phase of the application provide for integration of the diagnostic strategy into a primary care setting? To what extent does the application propose sites to be chosen for the UH3 phase representing diverse primary care settings?
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give separate scores for these items.
Protections for Human Subjects
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.
Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Individuals Across the Lifespan
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.
Vertebrate Animals
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.
Biohazards
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.
Resubmissions
Not Applicable.
Renewals
Not Applicable.
Revisions
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.
Applications from Foreign Organizations
Not Applicable.
Select Agent Research
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).
Resource Sharing Plans
Reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources, are reasonable: (1) Data Sharing Plan; (2) Sharing Model Organisms; and (3) Genomic Data Sharing Plan (GDS).
Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources:
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.
Budget and Period of Support
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by NCATS, in accordance with NIH peer review policy and procedures, using the stated review criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA Commons.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications will receive a written critique.
Applications may undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit (generally the top half of applications under review) will be discussed and assigned an overall impact score.
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 NCATS Advisory Council. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via email to the 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.
Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee Approval: Grantee institutions must ensure that protocols are reviewed by their IRB or IEC. To help ensure the safety of participants enrolled in NIH-funded studies, the awardee must provide NIH copies of documents related to all major changes in the status of ongoing protocols.
All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities. More information is provided at Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants.
Recipients of federal financial assistance (FFA) from HHS must administer their programs in compliance with federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, age and, in some circumstances, religion, conscience, and sex. This includes ensuring programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency. The HHS Office for Civil Rights provides guidance on complying with civil rights laws enforced by HHS. Please see https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-providers/provider-obligations/index.html and http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/civilrights/understanding/section1557/index.html.
HHS recognizes that research projects are often limited in scope for many reasons that are nondiscriminatory, such as the principal investigator’s scientific interest, funding limitations, recruitment requirements, and other considerations. Thus, criteria in research protocols that target or exclude certain populations are warranted where nondiscriminatory justifications establish that such criteria are appropriate with respect to the health or safety of the subjects, the scientific study design, or the purpose of the research. For additional guidance regarding how the provisions apply to NIH grant programs, please contact the Scientific/Research Contact that is identified in Section VII under Agency Contacts of this FOA.
Please contact the HHS Office for Civil Rights for more information about obligations and prohibitions under federal civil rights laws at https://www.hhs.gov/ocr/about-us/contact-us/index.html or call 1-800-368-1019 or TDD 1-800-537-7697.
In accordance with the statutory provisions contained in Section 872 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417), NIH awards will be subject to the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) requirements. FAPIIS requires Federal award making officials to review and consider information about an applicant in the designated integrity and performance system (currently FAPIIS) prior to making an award. An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through FAPIIS and comment on any information about itself that a Federal agency previously entered and is currently in FAPIIS. The Federal awarding agency will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to other information in FAPIIS, in making a judgement about the applicant’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 45 CFR Part 75.205 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants. This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.
The following special terms of award are in addition to, and not in lieu of, otherwise applicable U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) administrative guidelines, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) grant administration regulations at 45 CFR Part 75, and other HHS, PHS, and NIH grant administration policies.
The administrative and funding instrument used for this program will be the cooperative agreement, an "assistance" mechanism (rather than an "acquisition" mechanism), in which substantial NIH programmatic involvement with the awardees is anticipated during the performance of the activities. Under the cooperative agreement, the NIH purpose is to support and stimulate the recipients' activities by involvement in and otherwise working jointly with the award recipients in a partnership role; it is not to assume direction, prime responsibility, or a dominant role in the activities. Consistent with this concept, the dominant role and prime responsibility resides with the awardees for the project as a whole, although specific tasks and activities may be shared among the awardees and the NIH as defined below.
The PD(s)/PI(s) will have the primary responsibility for:
NIH staff have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below:
Publications
The Principal Investigator will be responsible for the timely submission of all abstracts, manuscripts and reviews (co)authored by project investigators and supported in whole or in part under this Cooperative Agreement. The Principal Investigator and Project Leaders are requested to submit manuscripts to the NIH Project Scientist within two weeks of acceptance for publication so that an up-to-date summary of program accomplishments can be maintained. Publications and oral presentations of work conducted under this Cooperative Agreement are the responsibility of the Principal Investigator and appropriate Project Leaders and will require appropriate acknowledgement of NIH support. Timely publication of major findings is encouraged.
Areas of Joint Responsibility include:
Intellectual Property
The successful development of diagnostic strategies and the integration of these strategies into clinical practice may require either substantial investment and support by private sector industries, and/or may involve collaborations with other organizations such as academic, other government agencies, and/or non-profit research institutions not directly involved in NIH programs. NIH recognizes that intellectual property rights are likely to play an important role in achieving the goals of this program. To this end, all awardees shall understand and acknowledge the following:
Data
Awardees will retain custody of and have primary rights to the data and resources developed under these awards, subject to Government rights of access consistent with current HHS, PHS, and NIH policies.
Dispute Resolution:
Any disagreements that may arise in scientific or programmatic matters (within the scope of the award) between award recipients and the NIH may be brought to Dispute Resolution. A Dispute Resolution Panel composed of three members will be convened. It will have three members: one designee from the primary research institution, one NIH designee, and a third designee with expertise in the relevant area who is chosen by the other two; in the case of individual disagreement, the first member may be chosen by the individual awardee. This special dispute resolution procedure does not alter the awardee's right to appeal an adverse action that is otherwise appealable in accordance with PHS regulation 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D and DHHS regulation 45 CFR Part 16.
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.
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.
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
eRA Service Desk (Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, and post-submission issues)
Finding Help Online: http://grants.nih.gov/support/ (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
General Grants Information (Questions regarding application instructions, application processes, and NIH grant resources)
Email: [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]
Alice Chen Grady, MD
National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS)
Telephone: 301-827-2015
Email: [email protected]
Carol Lambert, PhD
National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS)
Telephone: 301-435-0814
Email: [email protected]
Neena Gohil
National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS)
Telephone: 301-451-8313
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 45 CFR Part 75.