and Human Services (HHS)
EXPIRED
Participating Organization(s) |
National Institutes of Health (NIH) |
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney
Diseases (NIDDK) |
|
Funding Opportunity Title |
Limited Competition of the MAPP Research Network (U01) |
Activity Code |
U01 Research Project Cooperative Agreements |
Announcement Type |
Reissue of RFA-DK-07-003 |
Related Notices |
|
Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Number |
RFA-DK-13-507 |
Companion Funding Opportunity |
RFA-DK-13-025, U01 Research Project Cooperative Agreements |
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s) |
93.847; 93.313 |
Funding Opportunity Purpose |
The Multidisciplinary Approach to the Study of Chronic Pelvic Pain (MAPP) Research Network conducts multi-center studies of urologic chronic pelvic pain syndromes (UCPPS) commonly known as interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS) and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). The goal of the MAPP Network is to provide new insights into underlying etiology, natural history, and risk factors in order to provide a translational foundation to facilitate future clinical intervention efforts and improve clinical management for the syndromes. The MAPP Research Network is currently comprised of six Discovery Sites, a Data Coordination Core (DCC), and a Tissue and Technology Core (TATC). In the second project period, the MAPP Research Network will continue analyses of clinical data and assays of biological samples collected in the first project period and develop and implement a second phase of collaborative protocols. Another goal will be to generate a resource of clinical data and biological samples for sharing with the community in support of future studies designed to further advance discovery in this area. The purpose of this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) is to invite applications from the current MAPP Discovery and Core Sites for a second five year project period through a Limited Competition. |
Posted Date |
August 23, 2013 |
Open Date (Earliest Submission Date) |
October 27, 2013 |
Letter of Intent Due Date(s) |
October 27, 2013 |
Application Due Date(s) |
November 27, 2013, 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. |
AIDS Application Due Date(s) |
November 27, 2013, 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. |
Scientific Merit Review |
February/March, 2014 |
Advisory Council Review |
May, 2014 |
Earliest Start Date |
July, 2014 |
Expiration Date |
November 28, 2013 |
Due Dates for E.O. 12372 |
Not Applicable |
Required Application Instructions
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this FOA or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts). Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions. Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
Part 1. Overview Information
Part 2. Full Text of the Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
Section II. Award Information
Section III. Eligibility Information
Section IV. Application and Submission
Information
Section V. Application Review Information
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Section VII. Agency Contacts
Section VIII. Other Information
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Limited Competition will provide continued support for the current Multidisciplinary Approach to the Study of Chronic Pelvic Pain (MAPP) Research Network Discovery and Core Sites for a second five year project period.
The MAPP Research Network is a multi-center research group that conducts studies of urologic chronic pelvic pain syndromes (UCPPS), a term used by the network to encompass interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS) and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). The goal of the MAPP Research Network is to provide new insights into underlying etiology, natural history, and risk factors for UCPPS in order to provide a translational foundation to inform future clinical intervention efforts and improve clinical management. The MAPP Research Network was initiated under a cooperative agreement in 2008 for a five year funding period and is comprised of six Discovery Sites, a Data Coordination Core (DCC), and a Tissue and Technology Core (TATC). The principal research effort conducted by the MAPP Research Network is a prospective, epidemiological study of male and female UCPPS patients and controls to assess a wide range of urologic and non-urologic patient-reported measures (the Trans-MAPP Epidemiology/Phenotyping Study [Trans-MAPP EPS]) and integrated assessments of disease biomarkers, central nervous system structure/function, potential contributions of infectious agents, symptom variation (i.e., flare), and contributions of co-morbid non urologic pain syndromes, as well as initial efforts to develop new patient reported outcome measures. A number of other focused studies, including use of relevant animal models to study potential pathophysiology, are also being conducted. To date the network has recruited over a thousand study participants who are undergoing extensive phenotypic characterization as part of these multiple, integrated network protocols. Clinical data generated by the MAPP Research Network is centrally stored, managed and analyzed by the DCC and biological samples collected at the Discovery Sites are centrally stored and managed at the TATC.
This FOA will permit the MAPP Research Network to further address its original goal through (1) Continued analysis of the vast clinical data and biological samples collected during the first five year funding period to identify new insights into UCPPS etiology and patient phenotype and (2) Collecting additional data to further describe disease etiology and patient phenotype through a second phase of collaborative, integrated study protocols.
MAPP Research Network Goals and Objectives
The goal of the MAPP Research Network is to advance our understanding of disease phenotypes; underlying pathophysiology; treated natural history; and biologic, genetic, and behavioral risk factors for UCPPS (i.e. IC/BPS and CP/CPPS). An important objective of this program is to better understand the biologic and behavioral relationships between UCPPS and co-morbid non urologic pain syndromes. Co-morbid pain syndromes of primary interest are fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome, vulvodynia, and migraine headache. The MAPP Network undertakes multidisciplinary, multi-site, and highly interactive basic, translational, and clinical science research that utilizes new and novel approaches to investigate questions of significant clinical relevance. These efforts are expected to provide findings useful for designing future clinical studies of disease prevention and/or treatment. UCPPS is considered a systemic disorder that extends beyond the lower urinary tract (LUT). MAPP Network studies primarily focus on clinical phenotyping of patients and the use of human study materials (e.g. biological specimens). The MAPP Network encourages participation of junior faculty and new and experienced investigators in urological sciences and other areas of study. Another goal of the MAPP Network is to generate a resource of clinical data and biological samples for sharing with the community in support of future studies designed to further advance discovery in this area.
In the second project period, the MAPP Research Network will be comprised of the current six Discovery Sites and two shared Core Sites (the DCC and TATC), as well as additional, new Discovery Sites supported through RFA-DK-13-025, "Expansion of the MAPP Research Network." While the specific scientific interests of each MAPP Network site may differ, they all must demonstrate a dedication to the study of UCPPS as a central focus.
Scientific Priorities for MAPP Research Network Discovery Sites
The MAPP Network will emphasize, but not necessarily be limited to, the following research areas in the second project period. MAPP Network Discovery Sites must describe in their applications multiple Specific Aims that align with the below priorities. All proposed clinical studies must be integrated (e.g., use of common participants and biological samples) into a central longitudinal phenotyping study (below).
Discovery Sites must propose a Trans-MAPP (i.e., collaborative across most/all sites and using common participants and/or biological samples) longitudinal phenotyping study of UCPPS symptom patterns and associated phenotypic features designed to identify factors associated with - and potentially predictive of symptom change. The Trans-MAPP UCPPS Symptoms Patterns Study will provide a platform for standardized recruitment and core phenotyping and for integrating more specified patient phenotyping through associated, collaborative protocols. Applicants should propose strategies (in clinic, web-based, and/or device-based) to characterize symptom variation and associated clinical features, risk, predictors, and physiological changes over time using diverse measures, methods, and approaches (including, but not limited to the below described priority areas). Sites should include strategies to recruit and retain male and female UCPPS patients and controls (i.e., healthy controls and/or persons with co-morbid chronic pain syndromes of interest to fulfill study goals) into a prospective clinical phenotyping study involving in-clinic data and biological sample collection and intervening internet or device assisted data collection with a follow-up period of up to five years. Investigators may propose preliminary criteria for selection of UCPPS patients and control cohorts of interest, sample sizes, and study duration.
MAPP Network Discovery Sites should propose a number of additional, integrated Specific Aims that may include the following high-priority research areas:
(1) Justify the mode of generation of the model(s) relative to a proposed etiology of human UCPPS.
(2) Justify the model(s) based on the degree to which it mimics key human symptomatology (pain and urinary frequency at a minimum). Quantitative assessments of clinically-relevant pathology (pain and urinary frequency at a minimum) using well-established and broadly reproducible methods should be presented.
(3) Describe one or more translational pathways by which proposed animals may provide utility for testing of clinical insights and/or may provide mechanistic data suitable for exploring in patients.
Studies proposing UCPPS models that do not show relevance to human UCPPS and/or seek to explore mechanistic hypotheses without a feasible strategy for translation between the model and patients are not appropriate for this funding initiative. No more than 25% of a Discovery Site s budget may be allocated toward studies of proposed UCPPS models.
Integrated basic cellular, molecular, and biochemical studies addressing the underlying pathology and mechanisms of UCPPS using established in vitro methods will be supported primarily through RFA-DK-13-501, Limited Competition of the MAPP Research Network Data Coordinating Core (U01), and through other future, integrated awards (e.g., ancillary study awards, investigator-initiated R01s, etc).
All proposed scientific studies must be Trans-MAPP in design, though some variation in scientific approaches at various participating sites is acceptable. Applicants are encouraged to consider diverse, novel strategies in the development of study concepts. Areas of focus beyond the above broad research areas, such as additional measures of anatomical structure/function, may also be proposed, as long as they are sufficiently justified as addressing the fundamental goal of the network. Studies incorporating insights from the MAPP Research Network or from the general scientific community are highly encouraged in an effort to integrate diverse phenotyping information into a systemic characterization of UCPPS. Clinical trials or other clinical intervention/treatment studies are not within the scope of this FOA.
The MAPP Network will foster collaborations between network investigators within each site; across the network; and through numerous, more specialized/focused working groups. The MAPP Network is intended to be flexible and to rapidly integrate evolving information in the design of studies. It is anticipated some newly initiated research efforts will conclude and be replaced by to be defined studies that extend upon scientific insights. Network investigators will collectively prioritize final studies from those proposed and design final Trans-MAPP protocols. It is anticipated that not all proposed studies will be prioritized for immediate implementation, but might be performed in later stages of the second funding period. Patient data and samples collected in all efforts will be shared between all network sites and studies.
Function and Scientific Priority for MAPP Network Cores
The Data Coordination Core (DCC) will provide expertise in the coordination of multi-site research studies; data analysis; and the design of longitudinal phenotyping studies, such as the proposed Trans-MAPP UCPPS Symptom Patterns Study. To promote quality control, this shared Core will serve as the central coordinating center for data acquisition and statistical analyses functions for all clinical studies. The Core will also provide overall administrative support for the MAPP Research Network, including the scheduling and logistics of investigator and advisory group meetings and teleconferences; development and maintenance of a MAPP Network website and secure systems for data collection and sharing; preparation of reports and analyses for projects; and other scientific, administrative, and organizational functions, as required. The Core will work with the NIDDK Repository to coordinate procedures for coding, shipping, processing, receipt, and storage of study data that is to be maintained in the NIDDK Data Repository for eventual distribution. The DCC will also administer any MAPP Network sub-contracts that aid the network in addressing selected, major study goals. The DCC should outline plans to address these functions in advancing the goals of the MAPP Network, including a strategy to support a central, longitudinal patient phenotyping Trans-MAPP protocol. Sufficient senior-level statistical and program management expertise and support personnel should be included.
In addition to providing the above outlined functions, DCC funds will be used to support MAPP Research Network Ancillary Studies. These studies will enhance network scientific efforts and will be developed by MAPP Research Network investigators, potentially in collaboration with outside investigators, and will be reviewed for scientific merit and feasibility by an External Experts Panel (EEP). Ancillary Studies represent more limited, potentially single-site efforts and may serve for pilot/feasibility testing. The DCC should describe the process for administering the MAPP Research Network Ancillary Studies Program, but should not submit ideas for these studies in the application.
The Tissue Analysis and Technology Core (TATC) will provide biological sample collection, banking, annotation/blinding, and distribution as the major services to the MAPP Network. In addition, the TATC may provide limited, supplemental genomics and proteomics analyses for MAPP Network efforts, if needed. The Core will work with the NIDDK Biorepository to coordinate procedures for coding, shipping, processing, receipt, and storage of study biosamples prepare collected biosamples for eventual archiving and distribution. The TATC should outline plans to address these functions, including a strategy to support the central Trans-MAPP UCPPS Symptoms Patterns Study protocol, in the second funding period.
Administration and Meetings
A MAPP Research Network Steering Committee will be composed of Discovery Site and Core Site Directors and NIDDK Program Staff. The Steering Committee will meet regularly in-person and by telephone conference calls as a whole and in sub-working groups to develop and implement MAPP Research Network study protocols, review progress of individual projects, discuss results, interpret findings, and develop manuscripts for peer reviewed publications. The Steering Committee Chairman will lead an Executive Committee that will be comprised of the Chairman of the Steering Committee, representatives from the Core Sites, NIDDK staff, and additional MAPP Network investigators and support personnel, as needed. The Executive Committee will make operational decisions for the MAPP Network between Steering Committee meetings by means of telephone conference calls.
The NIDDK will assist the Steering Committee in the development of MAPP Research Network study protocols; will monitor the progress of projects and functioning of all network activities; will assist investigators in the analysis and interpretation of MAPP Research Network data; and will aid in preparation of manuscripts for publication.
The NIDDK will continue to utilize the External Experts Panel (EEP) established during the first project period of the MAPP Research Network to monitor research efforts and advise the Institute on the progress of network studies.
Funding Instrument |
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. |
Application Types Allowed |
Renewal The OER Glossary and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on these application types. |
Funds Available and Anticipated Number of Awards |
The NIDDK and partnering organizations intend to commit approximately $7.0 Million, which includes $6.8 Million from the NIDDK and $200,000 from the ORWH, in Fiscal Year 2014 to support six MAPP Research Network Discovery Sites, the DCC, and the TATC for a second project period. |
Award Budget |
Application budgets for current MAPP Network Discovery and Core Sites must reflect the actual needs of the proposed project. Discovery Sites may request up to $1 Million in Total Costs per year, the TATC may request up to $750,000 in Total Costs per year, and the DCC may request up to $1,250,000 in Total Costs per year. |
Award Project Period |
The scope of the proposed study should determine the project period. The maximum project period is 5 years . |
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made in response to 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
Governments
Other
Only the current participating awardees are eligible to apply for this FOA.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are 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 and should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate an existing account with the applicant organization’s eRA Commons account. 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.
Only current Program Director(s)/Principal Investigators (PDs/PIs) are eligible to apply for continuation of the current six Discovery Sites, DCC, and TATC. Clinical urology expertise must be represented within each Discovery Site either as a Site Director or leader(s) of one or more study. Additional Discovery Site personnel in senior roles should include: (1) a clinical scientist with a proven track record of research and patient recruitment for clinical research studies of IC/BPS and/or CP/CPPS or one of the co-morbid non-urologic pain syndromes often associated with IC/BPS, such as fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome, vulvodynia, or migraine headache; and (2) a basic or translational scientist with prior experience in addressing fundamental aspects of relevant disease pathophysiology. Discovery Sites should also include at least one health care professional (e.g., clinician, advanced practice nurse, physician's assistant, or psychologist) whose primary responsibility is direct patient care of UCPPS patients. Discovery Sites and Cores may utilize the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator (i.e. Multi-PD/PI) concept (see NOT-OD-06-036) to establish a collaborative team of two Program Directors/Principal Investigators who will serve as Co-Directors.
Investigators from diverse fields and those who have not been traditionally involved in studies of UCPPS, but who have expertise in relevant disciplines, are strongly encouraged to apply as Discovery Site Directors and as leaders on research studies. MAPP Research Network Sites are encouraged to include in their grant application the involvement of junior faculty and new investigators both in urological sciences and in related fields of study. Investigators may not be listed as participants in more than one application.
Because all relevant expertise may not be present at a single institution investigators may establish a multi-disciplinary team through collaborations with researchers outside their own institution. It is highly recommended that Discovery Sites centralize recruitment efforts and studies directly assessing patients to a single geographical location (e.g., the same institution or institutions within the same city). If Discovery Sites propose collaborations involving recruitment and/or patient phenotyping at sub-sites the need for the sub-site must be highly justified and a description of the sub-site’s ability to recruit and participate in all phenotyping assessments must be included. Collaborations with sub-sites that do not directly phenotype participants but provide specialized analyses of data or biological samples collected are permitted. Such arrangements must be highly justified and add important additional scientific capability to the network.
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.
NIH will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one already reviewed within the past thirty-seven months (as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement), except for submission:
Applicants must download the SF424 (R&R) application package associated with this funding opportunity using the Apply for Grant Electronically button in this FOA or following the directions provided at Grants.gov.
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed in this funding opportunity announcement to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
For information on Application Submission and Receipt, visit Frequently Asked Questions Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications.
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, preferably electronically, should be sent to:
Francisco O. Calvo, Ph.D.
Chief, Review Branch
Division of Extramural Activities, NIDDK
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 752, MSC 5452
Bethesda, MD 20892-5452
(express/courier service: Bethesda, MD 20817)
Telephone: 301-594-8897
E-mail: [email protected]
All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and must be followed, with the following exceptions or additional requirements:
The forms package associated with this FOA includes all applicable components, required and optional. Please note that some components marked optional in the application package are required for submission of applications for this FOA. Follow all instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide to ensure you complete all appropriate optional components.
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, with the additional instructions:
Sites must describe the roles and responsibilities of senior/key personnel, including in relation to the individual Specific Aims.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the additional instructions:
Sites must provide a detailed budget to allow for determination of respective funding for each proposed Specific Aim.
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:
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans (Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model Organisms, and Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS)) as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following modifications:
Appendix: Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions for completing Planned Enrollment Reports as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
When conducting clinical research, follow all instructions for completing Cumulative Inclusion Enrollment Report as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Foreign (non-U.S.) institutions must follow policies described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, and procedures for foreign institutions described throughout the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates. 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.
Organizations must electronically 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. If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late.
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 Applying Electronically.
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 by the Center for Scientific Review and responsiveness by components of participating organizations, NIH. Applications that are incomplete and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in NOT-OD-13-030.
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. As part of the NIH mission, all applications submitted to the NIH in support of biomedical and behavioral research are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.
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? 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?
Is the central focus of the proposed studies urologic chronic pelvic pain syndromes (UCPPS) (i.e., interstitial cystitis /painful bladder syndrome [IC/BPS] and/or chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome [CP/CPPS])? If successful, would the study provide new and significant insights into the pathophysiology and natural history of UCPPS, as well as co-morbid non-urologic pain syndromes in men and women? Does the study have potential to inform on symptom variation and associated phenotypic factors? Does the study have the potential to provide insights with the potential to lead to the development of future clinical prevention and therapeutic interventions and ultimately inform clinical management? Are studies designed to address questions of important clinical relevance? Do proposed studies build upon findings from the first project period? For studies of animal models is there sufficient justification for use of the model based on clinical significance and do studies propose a feasible and informative translational pathway (as defined in Scientific Priorities)?
Investigator(s)
Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or New Investigators, or 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?
Is appropriate research and clinical expertise represented at the Discovery site and its collaborating institutions (if any)? Do the proposed Discovery Site Director(s) and other listed investigators have strong research and/or clinical experience and expertise with a track record of important contributions in the area of UCPPS or other relevant fields? Is a strategy in place to integrate investigators from relevant scientific disciplines, including those who may not have been traditionally involved in the study of UCPPS? Is a plan in place to allow regular meetings of funded researchers and staff at the respective site in order to address administrative and scientific issues, progress, and planning? Does the applicant(s) describe the integration of promising new or junior investigators? Is clinical urology expertise represented within the Discovery Site? Is appropriate, relevant basic or translational science expertise included? Is one or more health care professional (e.g., clinician, advanced practice nurse, physician's assistant, or psychologist) whose primary responsibility is direct care of UCPPS patients included for Discovery Sites?
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?
Does the application address the MAPP Network research priorities through novel, multi-disciplinary approaches? Does the proposed scientific plan, if successful, have the potential to significantly increase and enhance our foundation of knowledge of UCPPS and offer insights that can be directly incorporated into the design of clinical efforts and testing of potential therapies to prevent or treat relevant disorders?
Approach
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses
well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project?
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?
If the project involves clinical research, are the plans for 1) protection of
human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion of minorities and members
of both sexes/genders, as well as the inclusion of children, justified in terms
of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
Are the MAPP Research Network’s major scientific priorities adequately addressed? If areas of investigation beyond these general priorities are proposed do they address the overall goals of the MAPP Network? Does at least one Specific Aim propose a Trans-MAPP study of UCPPS symptom patterns, as described in "Section I. Funding Opportunity Description"? Are all proposed studies collaborative, multi-site (i.e., Trans-MAPP) in design or potential? Are all proposed studies appropriate for integration into a central prospective clinical phenotyping study (i.e., the UCPPS Symptom Patterns Study)? Does the research design integrate use of the common MAPP Network Core resources? If studies using UCPPS animal models are proposed do they meet the specific requirements to enhance translational potential outlined in "Section I. Funding Opportunity Announcement"? Do Discovery Sites have a demonstrated ability to recruit, retain, and phenotype male and female UCPPS patients and control cohorts in the context of a prospective phenotyping protocol?
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?
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.
Proposed plan for collaboration for all MAPP Network Discovery Sites: Is a suitable plan in place for integration, communication, resource and data sharing, and collaboration between investigators within a Discovery Site and between the Discovery Site and its collaborating institutions (if any)? Does the Discovery Site have a stated commitment to multi-site integration, communication, sharing, and collaboration with other MAPP Network Discovery Sites and the MAPP Network Cores? How will the researchers with diverse expertise cooperate in conducting Discovery Site scientific efforts? Is there language in the application indicating willingness to share data and resources within the MAPP Research Network and ultimately provide relevant materials to the NIDDK Data and Biorepositories?
Additional Criteria for Data Coordination Core (DCC): Does the DCC contain sufficient and relevant expertise in multi-site study coordination and in data collection, storage, sample, distribution, quality control, and analysis? Do the Core Director and other personnel have prior experience and a record of success in conducting a similar Core facility in support of multiple studies and/or multiple sites? Are sufficient expertise and experience present for coordination and execution of MAPP Network statistical analyses in support of all multi-Discovery Site research efforts and, if needed, efforts at individual Discovery Sites? Does the Core have a commitment to integration, communication, resource and data sharing, and collaboration with other MAPP Discovery Sites and the other Core? Is sufficient expertise in place to address potential operational requirements of the MAPP Network, including the coordination of all meetings, agendas, conference calls, tracking of publications, protocol development, website development and maintenance, preparation of reports and analyses for presentation to the MAPP Research Network investigators and the External Experts Panel, development of systems for data sharing, and other operational activities? Do any proposed subcontracts provide important additional expertise (e.g., clinical expertise in UCPPS) or functionality? Does the proposed process for administration of the MAPP Network Ancillary Studies program appear adequate? Has a plan for data analysis for information collected during the first Project Period been described? Has a strategy for integrating the varied information collected during the first Project Period been described as part of the data analyses? Has a strategy for data analysis of information obtained during the second project and in support of a central UCPPS Symptom Patterns Study been proposed?
Additional Criteria for Tissue Analysis and Technology Core (TATC): Does the TATC contain sufficient and relevant basic, translational, and/or clinical expertise for conducting both the tissue and technological functions of the Core? Do the TATC Director and other personnel have prior experience and a record of success in conducting a similar Core facility in support of multiple studies and/or multiple sites? Does the Core have a commitment to integration, communication, resource and data sharing, and collaboration with other MAPP Network Discovery Sites and the other Core? Is sufficient expertise in place to address potential requirements of the MAPP Network, including the coordination of biosample collection, storage, and distribution (e.g. tissue, serum, DNA, and urine)? Is sufficient expertise in place to address potential technological requirements of the MAPP Network, including the development of assay platforms (e.g. genomics, proteomics, and tissue-based methods) and other relevant high-throughput technologies and methodologies and corresponding data analysis/interpretation? Has a strategy been proposed for collection and management of biological samples collected as part of a central UCPPS Symptoms Patterns Study?
Protections for Human Subjects
For research that involves human subjects but does
not involve one of the six 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 six 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 Children
When the proposed project involves clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion of minorities and members of both genders, as well as the inclusion of children. 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 five points: 1) proposed use of the animals, and species, strains, ages, sex, and numbers to be used; 2) justifications for the use of animals and for the appropriateness of the species and numbers proposed; 3) adequacy of veterinary care; 4) procedures for limiting discomfort, distress, pain and injury to that which is unavoidable in the conduct of scientifically sound research including the use of analgesic, anesthetic, and tranquilizing drugs and/or comfortable restraining devices; and 5) methods of euthanasia and reason for selection if not consistent with the AVMA Guidelines on Euthanasia. 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
For Renewals, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.
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
Reviewers will assess whether the study presents special opportunities for furthering research programs through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental conditions that exist in other countries and either are not readily available in the United States or augment existing U.S. resources.
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) Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS).
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 the NIDDK, 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.
Appeals of initial peer review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this FOA.
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 FOA. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the NDDK Advisory Council. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) via the eRA Commons.
Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
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.
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 the DUNS, SAM
Registration, and Transparency Act requirements as noted on the Award
Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website.
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.
Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award
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 Parts 74 and 92 (Part 92 is applicable when State and local Governments are eligible to apply), 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:
1. Developing the research design and study protocol, including definition of objectives and approaches, sample size and power calculations, and establishing procedures for participant recruitment and follow-up, data collection, quality control, interim data and safety monitoring, final data analysis and interpretation, and publication of results.
2. Establishing a Steering Committee to implement, coordinate and manage the project(s). Awardee(s) will name investigators to serve as members on a Steering Committee and other subcommittees, as appropriate, meeting periodically. Awardees will be required to accept and implement the common protocol(s) and procedures approved by the Steering Committee.
3. Designating Protocol Chairs. The Program Directors/Principal Investigators (for studies involving multiple protocols) shall designate a single Protocol Chairperson (if the Program Director/Principal Investigator does not assume this role) for each protocol to be carried out by the study group. The Protocol Chairperson shall function as the scientific coordinator for the protocol and shall assume responsibility for obtaining approval to implement the protocol from the Steering Committee and for developing and monitoring the protocol. Significant modifications to approved protocols must be approved by the Steering Committee.
4. Implementing collection of data specified by the study protocol. For a multi-center study, each awardee/site is required to ensure that data will be submitted expeditiously to the Data Coordinating Center. Additionally, individual investigators/sites must demonstrate the ability to implement the strategy specifically designed for their individual study population.
5. Establishing procedures for data quality and completeness. Awardees are responsible for ensuring accurate and timely assessment of the progress of each study, including development of procedures to ensure that data collection and management are: (1) adequate for quality control and analysis; (2) for clinical trials, as simple as appropriate in order to facilitate cooperation/referral of study participants by physicians to avoid unnecessary expense; and (3) sufficiently staffed across the participating institutions. For research involving multiple sites, a plan for analysis of pooled data will be developed by the Steering Committee.
6. Submitting interim progress reports, when requested, to the NIDDK Program Director including as a minimum, summary data on protocol performance. For coordinated multiple awards or a multi-site single award, the NIDDK Program Director may require additional information from individual awardees/sites. Such reports are in addition to the required annual noncompeting continuation progress report.
7. Establishing procedures, where applicable, for all participating institutions in coordinated awards to comply with FDA regulations for studies involving investigational agents or devices and to comply with the requirements of 45 CFR Part 46 for the protection of human subjects, and the NIH policy requirements for the inclusion of women, minorities and children.
8. Reporting of the study findings. Awardees will retain custody of and have primary rights to the data and software developed under these awards, subject to Government rights of access consistent with current DHHS, PHS, and NIH policies. The awardee must also be adherent to Study Publication and Presentation Policy. The NIDDK will have access to and may periodically review all data generated under an award. NIDDK staff may co-author publications of findings with awardees consistent with NIH and study policies.
9.Involving third parties in the study. This could entail involvement of industry or any other third party as participants, sharing resources, providing access to results, primary data or summaries of the study. However, except for licensing of patents or copyrights, support or involvement of any third party is permitted only after concurrence by NIDDK.
10. Publishing and to releasing publicly and disseminatinge results and other products of the study, in accordance with study protocols and steering committee policies on publications.
11. Maintaining confidentiality of information: The awardee(s) will maintain the confidentiality of the information developed by the investigators (i.e., protocols, data analysis, conclusions, etc.) as well as proprietary information of a company collaborating with the study.
12. Coordinating with the NIDDK Central Biosample, Genetic, and Data Repositories to prepare the collected data and samples for eventual archiving and distribution. In addition, if applicable, the PI or his/her designee will work with the NIDDK Biosample Repository to coordinate procedures for coding, shipping, processing, receipt, and storage of study samples that are to be maintained in the Repository. All samples and data transferred to the Repositories will be under the custodianship of the NIDDK, although the study s Steering Committee will have proprietary control of and exclusive access to the samples and data for an agreed-upon period of time. Subsequently samples and data will be available to the wider scientific community in accordance with the NIH policy on Data Sharing (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing/ and,
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing/data_sharing_guidance.htm#goals , and http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing/data_sharing_faqs.htm ).
13. Registering the study with clinical trials.gov if necessary. The Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 (FDAAA or US Public Law 110-85) was passed on September 27, 2007. The law requires mandatory registration and results reporting for certain clinical trials of drugs, biologics, and devices. If trials conducted under this grant are applicable clinical trials subject to FDAAA, the sponsor or his/her designee will perform the mandatory study registration and reporting of study results to ClinicalTrials.gov. For more information about this law and requirements for sponsors and/or investigators, visit the PRS and U.S. Public Law 110-85 Information Page at http://prsinfo.clinicaltrials.gov/fdaaa.html. In addition, grantees should be aware that clinical trials not covered by FDAAA may still require registration in an approved registry in order to be published, according to the guidelines issued by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (http://www.icmje.org/publishing_10register.html ).
NIH staff have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below.
An NIDDK Project Scientist with substantial involvement will:1. Serve as the contact point for all facets of the scientific interaction with the awardee (s). As required for the coordination of activities and to expedite progress, NIDDK may designate additional NIDDK staff to provide advice to the awardee on specific scientific and/or analytic issues. Such staff may include another Project Scientist or Analyst, who will provide direct technical assistance to the awardees to optimize the conduct and/or analysis of the study; or who may assist in the coordination of activities across multiple sites.
2. For multi-center studies, participate in the Steering Committee that oversees study conduct. The NIDDK Project Scientist or designee will be a full participant and voting member of the Steering Committee and, if applicable, subcommittees.
3. Serve as a resource to study investigators with respect to other ongoing NIDDK activities that may be relevant to the study to facilitate compatibility with the NIDDK missions and avoid unnecessary duplication of effort.
4. Have substantial involvement assisting in the design and coordination of research activities for awardees as elaborated below:
a. Assisting by providing advice in the management and technical performance of the investigations, coordinating required regulatory clearances for investigational agents used in the study, which are held by NIDDK. The NIDDK may reserve the right to cross file or independently file an Investigational New Drug Application or an Investigational Device Exemption form with the FDA.
b. The NDDK Project Scientist or designee may coordinate activities among awardees by assisting in the design, development, and coordination of a common research or clinical protocol and statistical evaluations of data; in the preparation of questionnaires and other data recording forms; and in the publication of results.
c. Reviewing procedures for assessing data quality and study performance monitoring.
d. The NIDDK Project Scientist or designee may be co-authors on study publications. In general, to warrant co-authorship, NIDDK staff must have contributed to the following areas: (a) design of the concepts or experiments being tested; (b) performance of significant portions of the activity; (c) participation in analysis and interpretation of study results and (d) preparation and authorship of pertinent manuscripts.
The NIDDK Program Official identified in the Notice of Award will:1. Interact with the principal investigator(s) on a regular basis to monitor study progress. Monitoring may include: regular communications with the principal investigator and staff, periodic site visits, observation of field data collection and management techniques, quality control, fiscal review, and other relevant matters; as well as attendance at Steering Committee, data safety and monitoring board, and related meetings. The NIDDK retains, as an option, periodic review of progress by researchers not involved with the study.
2. Review and approve protocols prior to implementation to insure they are within the scope of peer review, for safety considerations, as required by Federal regulations.
3. The NIDDK Program Official will monitor protocol progress, and may request that a protocol study be closed to accrual for reasons including: (a) accrual rate insufficient to complete study in a timely fashion; (b) accrual goals met early; (c) poor protocol performance; (d) patient safety and regulatory concerns; (e) study results that are already conclusive; (f) low likelihood of showing a benefit of the intervention (futility); and (g) emergence of new information that diminishes the scientific importance of the study question. The NIDDK will not permit further expenditures of NIDDK funds for a study after requesting closure except as specifically approved by the NIDDK.
4. Make recommendations for continued funding based on: a) overall study progress, including sufficient patient and/or data accrual; b) cooperation in carrying out the research (e.g., attendance at Steering Committee meetings, implementation of group decisions, compliance with the terms of award and reporting requirements); and/or c) maintenance of a high quality of research, which will allow pooling of data and comparisons across multiple cooperative agreement awards for common data elements.
5. Appoint a Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) as appropriate; the NIDDK Program Official or their designee will serve as the Executive Secretary and/or NIDDK program representative on the DSMB.
Areas of Joint Responsibility include:
In addition to the interactions defined above, NIDDK Project Scientist and Awardees shall share responsibility for the following activities:
1. Steering Committee.
A Steering Committee organized by the study investigator(s) will be the main governing body of the study.
The Steering Committee has primary responsibility to design research activities, establish priorities, develop common protocols and manuals, questionnaires and other data recording forms, establish and maintain quality control among awardees, review progress, monitor patient accrual, coordinate and standardize data management, and cooperate on the publication of results. Major scientific decisions regarding the core data will be determined by the Steering Committee. The Steering Committee will document progress in written reports to the NIDDK Program Official, and will provide periodic supplementary reports upon request.
The Steering Committee will be composed of all Principal Investigator(s), (including those of data coordinating /statistical centers, if any) and co-investigators as deemed necessary, and the NIDDK Project Scientist. The final structure of the Steering Committee and voting procedures will be established at the first meeting. The NIDDK Project Scientist will have voting membership on the Steering Committee, and as appropriate, its subcommittees. The frequency of Steering Committee meetings will be dictated by a vote of the members of the Steering Committee.
A Chairperson of the Steering Committee, other than the NIDDK Project Scientist, will be selected by the NIDDK. The Chairperson provides leadership to the Committee by conducting the Steering Committee meetings, representing the study group to the External Oversight
Committee established by the NIDDK and by interacting closely with the awardees during protocol development and implementation.
2. External Study Oversight.
An independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board will be established by the NIDDK for Phase III clinical trials or other high risk studies as appropriate. An Observational Study Monitoring Board (OSMB) will be established for observational/epidemiologic studies. These Boards will review study progress, safety data and interim results, as appropriate, and provide guidance to the NIDDK.
Dispute Resolution:
Any disagreement that may arise on scientific/programmatic matters (within the scope of the award), between award recipients and the NIDDK may be brought to dispute resolution. A dispute resolution panel will be composed of three members --one selected by the awardee (or the Steering Committee, with the NIDDK member not voting), a second member selected by NIDDK, and the third member elected by the two prior selected members. These special dispute resolution procedures in no way affect the awardee's right to appeal an adverse action that is otherwise appealable in accordance with PHS regulations at 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D, and HHS regulations at 45 CR Part 16.
When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the annual Non-Competing Progress Report (PHS 2590 or RPPR) and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
A final progress report, 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.
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity
and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
eRA Commons Help Desk (Questions regarding eRA Commons
registration, submitting and tracking an application, documenting system
problems that threaten submission by the due date, post submission issues)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
Web ticketing system: https://public.era.nih.gov/commonshelp
TTY: 301-451-5939
Email: [email protected]
Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions
regarding Grants.gov registration and submission, downloading forms and
application packages)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726
Web ticketing system: https://grants-portal.psc.gov/ContactUs.aspx
Email: [email protected]
GrantsInfo (Questions regarding application instructions and
process, finding NIH grant resources)
Telephone: 301-710-0267
TTY: 301-451-5936
Email: [email protected]
Chris Mullins, Ph.D.
Director of Basic Cell Biology Programs
Division of Kidney, Urologic and Hematologic Diseases
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney
Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: 301-451-4902
FAX: 301-480-3510
E-Mail: [email protected]
Susan E. Maier, Ph.D.
Deputy Director
Office of Research on Women’s Health (ORWH)
Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health
Telephone: 301-435-1573
Fax: 301-402-1798
E-Mail: [email protected]
Francisco O. Calvo, Ph.D.
Chief, Review Branch
Telephone: 301-594-8897
E-mail: [email protected]
Ms. Pamela Love
Grants Management Specialist
Grants Management Branch, Division of Extramural Activities
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney
Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: 301-435-6198
E-Mail: [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 Parts 74 and 92.
Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) |
|
|||
|
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health® |
||||||