Department of Health and Human Services

Part 1. Overview Information

Participating Organization(s)

National Institutes of Health (NIH)

Components of Participating Organizations

National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)

Funding Opportunity Title
Single Source for continuation of the Human Pancreas Analysis Program for Type-2 Diabetes (HPAP-T2D) (U01 Clinical Trial Not Allowed)
Activity Code

U01 Research Project – Cooperative Agreements

Announcement Type
Reissue of RFA-DK-18-016
Related Notices
  • August 31, 2022- Implementation Changes for Genomic Data Sharing Plans Included with Applications Due on or after January 25, 2023. See Notice NOT-OD-22-198.
  • August 5, 2022- Implementation Details for the NIH Data Management and Sharing Policy. See Notice NOT-OD-22-189.
Funding Opportunity Number (FON)
Companion Funding Opportunity
Assistance Listing Number(s)
Funding Opportunity Purpose

This is a non-competitive funding opportunity intended to fund a single award. The NIDDK is announcing its intent to issue a single source cooperative agreement award to the University of Pennsylvania. The purpose of this Single Source is to extend the Human Pancreas Analysis Program for Type 2 Diabetes (HPAP-T2D). The HPAP-T2D is a resource-generation program that is tasked with: 1) identifying, collecting and intensively characterizing primary pancreatic tissues from patients with T2D and related forms of islet dysfunctions, as well as age-matched controls; and 2) curating, organizing, analyzing and sharing the data resulting from the study of these tissues through the PANC DB open-access resource database. HPAP-T2D is a component of the Human Islet Research Network (HIRN), created in 2014 to support innovative and collaborative translational research to understand how human beta cells are lost in Type 1 Diabetes (T1D), and to find innovative strategies to protect and replace functional human beta cell mass.

Key Dates

Posted Date
October 24, 2023
Open Date (Earliest Submission Date)
January 29, 2024
Letter of Intent Due Date(s)

January 29, 2024

Application Due Dates Review and Award Cycles
New Renewal / Resubmission / Revision (as allowed) AIDS - New/Renewal/Resubmission/Revision, as allowed Scientific Merit Review Advisory Council Review Earliest Start Date
Not Applicable February 28, 2024 Not Applicable July 2024 October 2024 December 2024

All applications are due by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. 

Applicants are encouraged to apply early to allow adequate time to make any corrections to errors found in the application during the submission process by the due date.

Expiration Date
February 29, 2024
Due Dates for E.O. 12372

Not Applicable

Required Application Instructions

It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this NOFO or in a Notice from NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts).

Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the NOFO) 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.

Table of Contents

Part 2. Full Text of Announcement

Section I. Notice of Funding Opportunity Description

This is a non-competitive notice of funding opportunity intended to fund a single award.  The NIDDK is announcing its intent to issue a single source cooperative agreement to the University of Pennsylvania for continuation of the Human Pancreas Analysis Program for Type-2 Diabetes (HPAP-T2D).  The mission of the HPAP-T2D program is to generate and share with the community comprehensive deep molecular profiling data of the human pancreatic islet and other pancreatic tissues at various stages of Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) pathogenesis.  To date, high quality data has been generated from over 80 human pancreatic tissues (40 from donors with diabetes and 40 from age-matched controls), and shared through PANC DB, an open-access resource database. For the next phase of this program, the HPAP-T2D team will continue collecting and sharing data of additional donor tissues to increase the sample size and statistical power that will help the research community identify functional and molecular underpinnings of human T2D heterogeneity.  The University of Pennsylvania has unique capabilities for this competition including:

  • The HPAP-T2D team has established a complex and rigorous data-generation workflow of 20+ assays in precisely defining the molecular pathogenesis of human islet dysfunction by generating detailed datasets of physiological, morphological, transcriptomic, epigenomic and genomic information.
  • The workflow is executed by a small group of designated investigators and technicians in the team, using defined protocols, experimental standards and equipment, thereby maximally reducing technical variability and ensuring the reproducibility of the data-generation process from one donor tissue to the next.
  • The team has demonstrated ability to work seamlessly and operate a complex data-generation workflow under time constraints, dictated by the unpredictability of donor tissue availability.
  • The team has developed PANC DB, and demonstrated its efficiency in sharing datasets with the research community through it.


Much remains to be learned about the contribution of specific components of the islet tissue environment to the tightly-regulated functioning of the human endocrine pancreas, to the capacity of the tissue to respond and adapt to metabolic and environmental challenges during the life of an individual, and to pathogenic processes involved in the development of a variety of metabolic disease types, disease subtypes, and disorders. Our inability to easily access the target organ in living individuals, or to extract meaningful biological information from cadaver donor pancreata, limits our knowledge of pancreatic tissue architecture, cell composition and function to studies in rodent models. This lack of knowledge about the basic working components of the human pancreatic tissue, and about how the islet tissue environment may vary within a diverse human population in both health and disease, significantly impairs our ability to develop therapeutic strategies that can address specific changes in islet composition or function that contribute to the development of a given metabolic disease state.

In 2016, through RFA-DK-15-027, NIDDK started filling in this substantial gap in knowledge in the specific context of Type 1 Diabetes (T1D) pathogenesis by creating the Human Pancreas Analysis Program (HPAP), a resource-generation and data-analysis component of the larger Human Islet Research Network (HIRN). The mission of the HPAP is to apply a suite of technologies with single-cell resolution to the description of fixed pancreatic tissues and live cells, and to combine these measurements with a series of functional assays to obtain a high-resolution characterization of the human endocrine pancreas and its interaction with the immune system in a given tissue donor ( The primary function of the HPAP is to collect, analyze, and distribute the high value datasets resulting from this deep, extensive and systematic tissue phenotyping to the diabetes research community through a searchable community database called PANC DB ( ). Support for the T1D-related activities of HPAP (HPAP-T1D) was renewed in 2018 (RFA-DK-18-015) and 2020 (RFA-DK-20-016).

In 2019, NIDDK  leveraged the investment  made in creating HPAP, and expanded the operational scope of the program to include the deep phenotyping of human pancreata from donors with Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) and pre-diabetes (RFA-DK-18-016) by creating the Human Pancreas Analysis Program for Type 2 Diabetes (HPAP-T2D).  The practical deliverable of HPAP-T2D is to generate highly-informative, high-resolution datasets that can be made readily available to the research community  whose interest is in diabetes, obesity and metabolic syndrome. The broader goal is to help investigators around the world formulate novel hypotheses about human disease pathogenesis and heterogeneity (that could be further explored or validated through future grant applications or other funding means) and to facilitate the development of innovative or more targeted therapeutic strategies for treating metabolic disorders and diabetes.

This NOFO will support the renewal and continuation of the HPAP-T2D effort. While the overall scope of HPAP-T2D remains the same, the renewal application should take into account the following guiding principles:

  • Disease heterogeneity: clinical studies have now provided clear evidence that T2D is not a single, uniform disease but rather is made up of multiple distinct clinical categories, a phenomenon often termed “T2D heterogeneity”. This is perhaps not too surprising given the multiple organ systems involved in disease pathogenesis and the complex interplay between individually weak T2D diabetes risk loci and a variety of environmental factors. Of note, the clinical T2D subgroups suggested in the recent literature are not identical, illustrating the difficulty in sub-classifying the disease based solely on patient data. The HPAP-T2D program is uniquely positioned to contribute to the definition of T2D subgroups based on islet functional as well as molecular and epigenomic data collected from its donor tissues. It is expected that HPAP-T2D will employ these complex datasets to help define islet functional subgroups in human T2D.
  • Continuity in data collection and data standards: After only a few years of operation, HPAP-T2D has already yielded important new insights into the pathogenesis of T2D, following analysis of the HPAP-T2D data by both HPAP and non-HPAP investigators. A key to this success is a rigorous and standardized operational workflow, from human tissue procurement and processing to the multimodal single-cell analysis of various pancreatic compartments. Each assay contributing to the functional and molecular phenotyping of these tissues is performed by a single team of investigators and technicians, minimizing the risk for noise and variability in data production. The large majority of the HPAP-T2D data-collection, data-curation and data-sharing through the PANC DB open-access resource database is currently performed at the University of Pennsylvania. The need for continuity in data-generation processes is the primary reason and main rationale as to why NIDDK seeks a single renewal application from the existing HPAP-T2D team, and why we ask the team to introduce only minimal changes as possible to the legacy protocols and data standards used in the previous funding period.
  • Technological improvements: while continuity in the data-generation process and workflow is critical to maintain data homogeneity and to facilitate future cross-analysis of old and new datasets, taking advantage of powerful emerging technologies should also be a priority of the HPAP-T2D effort, and the renewal proposal should strike a balance between continuity and innovation. In the context of a limited budget, introducing new technologies may come at the price of retiring less informative legacy assays.

Research Goals and Objective 

Through this renewal, the HPAP-T2D team will continue working on the specific HPAP-T2D as defined in the original HPAP-T2D RFA (RFA-DK-18-016), with minimal disturbances to the existing data-generation workflow, and with introducing technological innovations only when these can result in a significant deepening of the HPAP-T2D pancreatic tissue phenotyping effort. At a minimum, HPAP-T2D investigators need to articulate how they will perform the following required tasks in the renewal proposal:

1) Assemble and phenotype a diverse collection of human pancreata relevant to T2D pathogenesis and heterogeneity:

HPAP-T2D should propose and implement a strategy for identifying and collecting human pancreatic specimens from donors with T2D and related metabolic phenotypes, as well as from age-matched healthy donors. HPAP-T2D should establish criteria for inclusion/exclusion of tissues into the HPAP-T2D collection with the goal of generating datasets that reveal unique aspects of pancreatic function/dysfunction associated with the development and/or heterogeneity of T2D. Given the limited funding provided through this initiative, investigators will need to focus their area of investigation to collect enough specimens to answer important biological questions with enough statistical power.  At a minimum, the HPAP-T2D team should describe how they intend to:

  • Identify, coordinate and manage tissue source sites to acquire human pancreata from cadaver donors that are relevant to the mission of HPAP-T2D. The tissue source sites would be responsible for skilled and expedited autopsy, sample acquisition and processing, preservation, as well as collection and completion of proper documents, including consents. HPAP-T2D should ensure that the human sample collection and handling procedures comply with current NIH policies. There should be a focus on ensuring cadaveric donor samples from a diverse population;
  • Collect whenever possible the de-identified medical records of the donors to include diabetes or pre-diabetes history, but also information about co-morbidities such as vascular disease, renal insufficiency, medications and overall health. At a minimum, all the information currently collected by the HPAP team on each and every tissue donor should continue to be provided and shared through PANC DB under the formatted “Donor Summary” tab. Improvements towards a better characterization of disease heterogeneity could include measuring additional disease markers in the blood of the pancreatic donors based on recent published efforts at re-classifying human T2D;
  • Process pancreata using protocols that allow for multiple analytical paradigms to be performed on the same specimen, including functional studies on subsets of live islets, sorted endocrine and immune cells, and a variety of molecular studies on fixed tissue. Ideally, this fine-processing step should be performed by the current surgery team at the U Penn location, to minimize output variability. The creation of an alternative tissue isolation center with identical surgical and tissue-processing protocols could be considered to help manage tissue donation opportunities emerging outside the upper East Coast of the United States, from where the bulk of HPAP-T2D donor tissues are currently originating. The proposed tissue-processing strategy should closely mimic the current HPAP-T2D protocol for systematic isolation of live islets from part of the tissue (to be used for functional studies of islets and transcriptomics analyses on sorted islet cell populations) and fixation of the rest of the specimen using a variety of procedures to allow for multiomics analyses with single-cell resolution ;
  • Define and run a standard set of deep phenotyping experiments (molecular, epigenetic, functional and anatomical) to create a reference dataset to be associated with each and every HPAP-T2D specimen. At a minimum, this set of experiments should include the most robust and useful assays currently being run within the existing HPAP-T2D, and following the same protocols  to ensure consistency and continuity between the datasets that were generated during the previous funding cycle and future ones.  The list of assays systematically run by HPAP-T2D are documented on the PANC DB portal ( ) and includes experiments in histology (histological sectioning and staining), islet cell sequencing (RNAseq, ATACseq, whole genome bisulfite sequencing), islet physiology (calcium imaging, oxygen consumption, perifusion studies for insulin and glucagon) and imaging-based analyses of pancreatic tissue slices. 
  • Add powerful new technologies to the suite of existing HPAP-T2D phenotypic assays. An example could be the adoption of spatial omics measurements to perform imaging-based identification of large numbers of transcripts and  protein species through a single experiment with single cell resolution. Such a technology would allow the molecular characterization of every single cell present in a given pancreatic tissue slice, together with in-depth description of each cell's tissue environment, thereby greatly enhancing the kind of cell-based information currently available in PANC DB. Ideally, the chosen protocol would allow for the retrospective analysis of stored HPAP-T2D samples to optimize the phenotyping impact across the entire HPAP-T2D sample collection. The cost of developing and implementing such a new protocol could be offset by dropping legacy assays that are redundant and less powerful  than the new technology, such as the currently used Imaging Mass Cytometry and CODEX protocols.
  • Contribute to the greater understanding of T2D heterogeneity in the human population. This could be achieved through the targeted selection of specific categories of donors, or emerge from the analysis of the data itself by identifying functional and molecular signatures in both healthy and T2D tissue donor leading to new ways of classifying disease and disease risk.
  • Catalog, annotate and store all residual (unused) pancreatic tissues and cells with methods that preserve bio-specimen integrity and will allow future experiments to complement the standard suite of phenotyping analyses..

2) Maintain and grow T2D-relevant datasets: 

The HPAP-T2D team should continue to organize and integrate all functional, anatomical and molecular data and metadata generated from the HPAP-T2D tissue analyses into the  community database PANC DB ( ) that enables the scientific community to explore important aspects of pancreatic function and dysfunction associated with both T1D (HPAP-T1D datasets) and T2D (HPAP-T2D datasets). The overall organization of the database, as well as its analysis and visualization tools, should continue to facilitate the exploration of 3D structural and functional relationships at the cellular and organ-wide level, generating mechanistic hypotheses related to T2D pathogenesis or the disease diversity in the human population, or identifying novel candidate drug targets. In order to fulfill this function in the years to come the HPAP-T2D computational biology teams should continue at a minimum to support the following functions:

  • Share datasets with the research community as soon as they are generated and quality-controlled;
  • Develop and improve tools and protocols to efficiently extract, curate and incorporate all data resulting from the study of HPAP-T2D tissues into PANC DB. The database should be flexible and extensible to manage and integrate multiple types of data, including clinical data, data resulting from physiological assays, genomics, proteomics and metabolomics data and imaging-based data. The data should also be interoperable with other related databases;
  • Take advantage of recent development in artificial intelligence (AI) to rethink the way HPAP-T2D data could be analyzed and made AI-ready;
  • Improve analysis tools for data integration, including for the co-registration of data of disparate but complementary nature (anatomical/spatial, functional and multiple omics);
  • Maintain and enhance the PANC DB open-access portal with user-friendly interfaces to allow the research community easy access to the data;
  • Continue to develop/adapt and share tools for on-line data mining, image analysis and visualization of data and metadata by the research community; 
  • Work closely with the user community to build or make available any additional tool or feature that can facilitate the deposition, archiving, extraction, analysis or visualization of data;
  • Assist HIRN investigators and the wider research community in accessing and analyzing HPAP-T2D datasets through presentations, webinars, tutorials and hands-on workshops;
  • Advertise HPAP-T2D’s activities and resources to the scientific community worldwide through publications and presentations at international meetings;
  • Ensure that datasets and documentation are in a widely-adopted “standard format” for continuing data accessibility beyond the close out of the project

3) Forge partnerships with relevant investigator communities and research programs:

HPAP-T2D will be responsible for leveraging the activities of relevant programs through the formation of strategic partnerships with existing efforts related to its mission. Such partners should include at least the following:

  • HPAP-T1D investigators: the HPAP-T2D team should work closely with HPAP-T1D investigators to ensure standardization of tissue processing, data-generation and data format to facilitate integration and interoperability of all HPAP-generated datasets into the common PANC DB database.
  • HIRN investigators: the HPAP-T2D program will continue to be part of the NIDDK-supported HIRN, whose overall mission is to better understand how human beta cells are lost in T1D, and to find innovative strategies to protect or replace functional beta cell mass in diabetic patients. The HPAP-T2D team will join the HPAP-T1D team and a group of investigators funded in response to the recent RFA on “High-Resolution Exploration of the Human Islet Tissue Environment” ( RFA-DK-21-017) to form the ‘Human Pancreas Analysis Consortium” or HPAC. HPAP-T2D is expected to work closely with the Human Islet Research Enhancement Center (HIREC) to facilitate the organization and sharing of data and reagents generated by HPAP-T2D activities. In conjunction with the HIREC, the HPAP should develop workshops, webinars and community outreach strategies to optimize community use of HPAP resources and to gather feedback from users. The HPAP-T2D team will be expected to work collaboratively with all of their HIRN colleagues and to contribute to an environment of sharing and trust across the network. All HPAP-T2D investigators will be expected to adhere to the sharing policies developed by the HIRN as a term of the award and to the Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award.  In the application, budget requests must include costs for the PD(s)/PI(s) and up to three other HPAP-T2D staff members to attend the annual HIRN Investigator's Scientific Retreat.
  • HIRN PanKbase: the HPAP-T2D team should describe how it plans to interact with the recently-created Pancreas Knowledgebase Program or PanKbase (see RFA-DK-22-018), that will serve as a centralized resource about the human pancreas for diabetes research; will provide access to deeply curated high-quality datasets, knowledge in computable forms, advanced data science tools and workflows; and will enable open and reproducible multidisciplinary collaboration toward accelerating biomarker and therapeutic target development.
  • Scientific collaborators: residual HPAP-T2D cells and tissues are and will continue to be in limited supply following the thorough and systematic phenotyping that is the core mission of HPAP-T2D. In addition, the vast amount of data associated with any residual material makes it an even rarer and valuable commodity. For these reasons, the open sharing of residual HPAP-T2D cells and tissues with the broader scientific community is not the best or most efficient way to gather additional and meaningful biological information to complement the extensive analysis performed on each and every HPAP-T2D sample. Rather, the further exploration of these tissues will need to be carefully planned and justified in collaboration with the HPAP-T2D team and the HPAP-T2D Project Scientist, so as to optimize the biological significance and value to the community of any additional experiments. In their renewal application, the HPAP-T2D team should propose guidelines for candidate collaborators to approach the HPAP-T2D team to propose additional experiments, whether hypothesis-driven or hypothesis-generating. These guidelines should describe the process by which projects will be prioritized and selected, and should include a mechanism to ensure that all resulting data will be shared with the community through PANC DB.

See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.

Section II. Award Information

Funding Instrument

Cooperative Agreement: A financial assistance 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 NOFO.

Application Types Allowed

Renewal application only for the awards supported under RFA-DK-18-016.

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 NOFO.

Clinical Trial?

Not Allowed: Only accepting applications that do not propose clinical trials.

Funds Available and Anticipated Number of Awards

NIDDK intends to commit $3 million in FY 2025 to fund 1 award.

Award Budget
Application budgets are limited to $2 million direct costs per year.
Award 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 from this NOFO.

Section III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants

Eligible Organizations

Only the following applicant may apply for this single source funding: University of Pennsylvania. Please refer to Section I. Notice of Funding Opportunity Information for more details. 



Foreign Organizations

Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Organizations) are not eligible to apply.

Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.

Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are allowed. 

Required Registrations

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. Failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission, please reference NIH Grants Policy Statement Section Electronically Submitted Applications for additional information

  • System for Award Management (SAM) – Applicants must complete and maintain an active registration, which requires renewal at least annually. The renewal process may require as much time as the initial registration. SAM registration includes the assignment of a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code for domestic organizations which have not already been assigned a CAGE Code.
    • NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code – Foreign organizations must obtain an NCAGE code (in lieu of a CAGE code) in order to register in SAM.
    • Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) - A UEI is issued as part of the registration process. The same UEI must be used for all registrations, as well as on the grant application.
  • eRA Commons - Once the unique organization identifier is established, organizations can register with eRA Commons in tandem with completing their registrations; all registrations must be in place by time of submission. eRA Commons requires organizations to identify at least one Signing Official (SO) and at least one Program Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) account in order to submit an application.
  • – Applicants must have an active SAM registration in order to complete the registration.

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.

Eligible Individuals (Program Director/Principal Investigator)

Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with their organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from diverse backgrounds, including underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, individuals with disabilities, and women are always encouraged to apply for NIH support. See, Reminder: Notice of NIH's Encouragement of Applications Supporting Individuals from Underrepresented Ethnic and Racial Groups as well as Individuals with Disabilities, NOT-OD-22-019.

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 the PD/PIs associated with the award issued under RFA-DK-18-016  to University of Pennsylvania  is eligible to apply for this single source funding. Please refer to Section 1. Notice of Funding Opportunity Information for more details.

2. Cost Sharing

This NOFO does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 1.2 Definition of Terms.

3. Additional Information on Eligibility

Number of Applications

Only one application per institution (normally identified by having a unique UEI or NIH IPF number) is allowed. 

The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time, per NIH Grants Policy Statement Section Submission of Resubmission Application. This means that the NIH will not accept:

  • A new (A0) application that is submitted before issuance of the summary statement from the review of an overlapping new (A0) or resubmission (A1) application.
  • A resubmission (A1) application that is submitted before issuance of the summary statement from the review of the previous new (A0) application.
  • An application that has substantial overlap with another application pending appeal of initial peer review (see NIH Grants Policy Statement Similar, Essentially Identical, or Identical Applications).

Section IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Requesting an Application Package

The application forms package specific to this opportunity must be accessed through ASSIST, Workspace or an institutional system-to-system solution. Links to apply using ASSIST or Workspace are available in Part 1 of this NOFO. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution.

2. Content and Form of Application Submission

It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide except where instructed in this notice of funding opportunity to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.


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:

  • Descriptive title of proposed activity
  • Name(s), address(es), and telephone number(s) of the PD(s)/PI(s)
  • Names of other key personnel
  • Participating institution(s)
  • Number and title of this funding opportunity

The letter of intent should be sent to:

John Connaughton, Ph.D.
Chief, Scientific Review Branch
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: 301-594-7797

Page Limitations

All page limitations described in the How to Apply – Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.

Instructions for Application Submission

The following section supplements the instructions found in the How to Apply – Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this NOFO.

SF424(R&R) Cover

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

SF424(R&R) Project/Performance Site Locations

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

SF424(R&R) Other Project Information

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

SF424(R&R) Senior/Key Person Profile

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

R&R or Modular Budget

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

R&R Subaward Budget

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

PHS 398 Research Plan

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:

Research Strategy: 

HPAP-T2D applicants must include in their research strategy:

  • Progress report: a summary of what has been accomplished during the previous funding period, to include information on the use of HPAP-T2D datasets by the non-HPAP research community and on the new biological knowledge that has resulted from the analysis of HPAP-T2D data to date;
  • A summary of the proposed tissue-processing, data-generation, data-analysis and data-sharing workflow. At a minimum, most of the phenotypic assays currently run by the HPAP-T2D (as documented on the PANC DB community portal) should be proposed. These include experiments in histology, islet cell sequencing (RNAseq, ATACseq and whole genome bisulfite sequencing), islet physiology (calcium imaging, oxygen consumption, perifusion studies for insulin and glucagon) and imaging-based analysis of pancreatic tissues.. Applicants are also encouraged to add a limited number of new assays to take advantage of emerging technologies that can significantly enhance HPAP-T2D's phenotyping depth. Such new assays could include state-of-the-art spatial omics platforms for the exploration of pancreatic tissue slices at single cell resolution. The addition of new assays, and the possible elimination of less informative legacy assays to make room for them within the HPAP-T2D budget, should be clearly justified in the application;
  • A description of how the applicant team plans to structure and use the HPAP-T2D workflow to contribute to a greater understanding of T2D heterogeneity;
  • An estimated number of the human pancreatic specimens to be collected and characterized per year of operation and a rationale for the prioritization of tissue donors; 
  • A strategy to analyze the data being generated through HPAP-T2D, including the meta-analysis of the multiple datasets being generated through the suite of functional, omics-based and imaging-based phenotypic assays, in order to collect as much new information as possible regarding human disease initiation, progression and heterogeneity. Such a strategy should include the use of artificial intelligence (AI)-based analytical tools;
  • A plan on how to prioritize and manage requests for collaborations by non-HPAP investigators wanting to access residual HPAP-T2D cells and tissues to generate experimental data that would complement HPAP-T2D's own data-generation and data analysis;
  • An outreach plan describing how the team will advertise HPAP-T2D activities and facilitate/encourage the use of its datasets;
  • A plan to encourage feedback from the user community on how to improve the operability of PANC DB, including its analysis and visualization tools;
  • A description of the contribution of each team member to the overall effort. 

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.

Letters of Support: HPAP-T2D applications should identify the tissue source sites and provide supporting letters from these sites to demonstrate capacity and commitment to deliver the types and numbers of human pancreatic specimens described in the grant application.

  • The NIDDK intends the resource sharing plans for the HPAP-T2D to cover protocols (including analytical methods), experimental workflow, deidentified information about tissue donors, and all data systematically generated by the team.This information should be made available through the existing PANC DB open-sharing database.
  • Applicants are expected to register resources supported by this NOFO with the NIDDK Information Network (dkNET) at and use Research Resource Identifiers (RRID) assigned through dkNET in any publication supported by this NOFO.
  • Applicants should also describe how the results from additional experiments conducted on residual (stored) HPAP-T2D samples could be added to the standard datasets and made available to PANC DB users.
  • Upon completion or termination of the HPAP-T2D project, the awardee is responsible for making all HPAP-T2D resources broadly available (e.g., putting into the public domain) or making them accessible to the research community according to the NIH-approved plan submitted for each project, for making data and materials available to the scientific community and the NIH for the conduct of research, as appropriate. 

Other Plan(s): Note: Effective for due dates on or after January 25, 2023, the Data Management and Sharing Plan will be attached in the Other Plan(s) attachment in FORMS-H application forms packages.

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:

  • All applicants planning research (funded or conducted in whole or in part by NIH) that results in the generation of scientific data are required to comply with the instructions for the Data Management and Sharing Plan. All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, must address a Data Management and Sharing Plan.
  • The data management and sharing plan  should include a sustainability strategy to ensure access to HPAP-T2D data by the community once the project period expires. 

Appendix: Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

  • No publications or other material, with the exception of blank questionnaires or blank surveys, may be included in the Appendix.

PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information

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.

Delayed Onset Study

Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start). All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

PHS Assignment Request Form

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed.

3. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)

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

4. Submission Dates and Times

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 (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 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 on or before the application due date and time.  If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late. Applications that miss the due date and time are subjected to the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section Electronically Submitted Applications.

Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.

Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in the How to Apply – Application Guide.

5. Intergovernmental Review (E.O. 12372)

This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.

6. Funding Restrictions

All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 7.9.1 Selected Items of Cost.

7. Other Submission Requirements and Information

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 form. Failure to register in the Commons and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the successful submission of an electronic application to NIH. See Section III of this NOFO for information on registration requirements.

The applicant organization must ensure that the unique entity identifier provided on the application is the same identifier used in the 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 National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, NIH. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.

Post Submission Materials

Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy

Section V. Application Review Information

1. Criteria

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.

Overall Impact

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).

Scored Review Criteria

Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.


Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project rigorous? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

Specific to this NOFO: What potential is there for significant insight into the causes of human Type 2 Diabetes that can lead to improvement in the treatment of patients based on the proposed study design? How substantial will the HPAP-T2D contributions be to our understanding of T2D  heterogeneity?


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?


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 NOFO: how well have novel phenotyping approaches been considered? Has a good balance between retaining important legacy assays and proposing new ones been struck? Are the proposed bioinformatics tools for data analysis and visualization take good advantage of recent advances in the area of artificial intelligence (AI)?


Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have the investigators included plans to address weaknesses in the rigor of prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects? 

If the project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, are the plans to address 1) the protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults), justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?


Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment, and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?

Additional Review Criteria

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.


For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.

For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.


When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults) to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.


The committee will will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following three points: (1) a complete description of all proposed procedures including the species, strains, ages, sex, and total numbers of animals to be used; (2) justifications that the species is appropriate for the proposed research and why the research goals cannot be accomplished using an alternative non-animal model; and (3) interventions including analgesia, anesthesia, sedation, palliative care, and humane endpoints that will be used to limit any unavoidable discomfort, distress, pain and injury in the conduct of scientifically valuable research. Methods of euthanasia and justification for selected methods, if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals, is also required but is found in a separate section of the application. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals Section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animals Section.


Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.


Not Applicable


For Renewals, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.


Not Applicable

Additional Review Considerations

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.


Reviewers will assess whether the project 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.


Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).


Reviewers will comment on whether the Resource Sharing Plan(s) (e.g., Sharing Model Organisms) or the rationale for not sharing the resources, is reasonable.


For projects involving key biological and/or chemical resources, reviewers will comment on the brief plans proposed for identifying and ensuring the validity of those resources.


Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.

2. Review and Selection Process

Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by the NIDDK Review Branch, 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.

Appeals of initial peer review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this NOFO.

Applications will be assigned to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this NOFO. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the National Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease Advisory Council. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:

  • Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as determined by scientific peer review.
  • Availability of funds.
  • Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.

3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates

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. Refer to Part 1 for dates for peer review, advisory council review, and earliest start date.

Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.4.4 Disposition of Applications.

Section VI. Award Administration Information

1. Award Notices

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 recipient's business official.

Recipients must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.6. 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 NOFO will be subject to terms and conditions found on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website.  This includes any recent legislation and policy applicable to awards that is highlighted on this website.

Individual awards are based on the application submitted to, and as approved by, the NIH and are subject to the IC-specific terms and conditions identified in the NoA.

Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee Approval: Recipient 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 recipient must provide NIH copies of documents related to all major changes in the status of ongoing protocols.

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

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: Generaland Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Recipients, and Activities, including of note, but not limited to:

If a recipient is successful and receives a Notice of Award, in accepting the award, the recipient agrees that any activities under the award are subject to all provisions currently in effect or implemented during the period of the award, other Department regulations and policies in effect at the time of the award, and applicable statutory provisions.

If a recipient receives an award, the recipient must follow all applicable nondiscrimination laws. The recipient agrees to this when registering in The recipient must also submit an Assurance of Compliance (HHS-690). To learn more, see the HHS Office for Civil Rights website.

HHS recognizes that NIH 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 NOFO.

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 2 CFR Part 200.206 “Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants.” This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.

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 2 CFR Part 200 , 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 Recipients 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 Recipients for the project as a whole, although specific tasks and activities may be shared among the Recipients and the NIH as defined below. 

The PD(s)/PI(s) will have the primary responsibility for:

  • Recipient(s) will be primarily responsible for defining the objectives and approaches, planning, conduct, analysis, and publication of results, interpretations, and conclusions of studies conducted under the terms and conditions of the cooperative agreement award.
  • The Program Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) will assume responsibility and accountability to the applicant organization officials and to the NIH for the performance and proper conduct of the research supported under this Funding Opportunity Announcement (NOFO) in accordance with the terms and conditions of award, as well as all pertinent laws, regulations and policies.
  • Recipient(s) will retain custody of and have primary rights to the data and software developed under these awards, subject to Government policies regarding rights of access consistent with current DHHS, PHS, and NIH policies.
  • Recipients are responsible for their staff in maintaining confidentiality of the information as developed by the network/consortium, including, without limitation, study protocols, data analysis, conclusions, etc. per policies approved by the Steering Committee (SC) as well as any confidential information received by third party collaborators.
  • Recipients must analyze, publish and/or publicly release and disseminate results, data and other products of the study in a timely manner, concordant with the approved plan for making quality-assured data and materials available to the scientific community and the NIH, consistent with NIH policies and achieving the goals of the NOFO.
  • Data Management and Sharing Plan: In accordance with the NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing (NIH NOT-OD-21-013), the NIDDK approved plan will become a term and condition of award, be routinely monitored during the award period, and compliance may factor into future funding decisions. By the end of the funding or proprietary period, a recipient or study group may not continue to use or share study generated resources until those resources are available to the public via a NIDDK approved repository per the NIDDK approved plan. 
  • Recipient(s) will be required to participate in a cooperative and interactive manner with members of the network/consortium including designated NIH staff (e.g., Program Official, Project Scientist, Project Coordinator).
  • Recipient(s) agree to establish agreements amongst themselves that address the following issues: (1) procedures for data sharing among network/consortium members and data sharing with industry partners; (2) procedures for safeguarding confidential information, including without limitation, any data generated by the network/consortium as well as information and/or data received from external collaborators; (3) procedures for addressing ownership of intellectual property that result from aggregate multi-party data; (4) procedures for sharing bio-specimens under an overarching Material Transfer Agreement (MTA) amongst network/consortium members that operationalizes material transfer in an efficient and expeditious manner; (5) procedures for reviewing publications, determining authorship, and industry access to publications.
  • Any third-party collaboration (including but not limited to interactions with organizations from industry, academia, and nonprofit institutions) should be governed by a research collaboration agreement (e.g., Clinical Trial Agreement, Research Collaborative Agreement, etc.) or any third-party contract mechanism(s) with terms that ensure the collaboration is conducted in accordance with the Cooperative Agreement, applicable NIH/NIDDK policies and procedures, applicable network/consortium policies, and with written approval from NIDDK Program staff. Any relevant proposed third-party agreements related to the network/consortium studies between recipient  and third-party will be provided to the NIDDK Program staff and NIDDK Technology Advancement Office for review, comment, and approval to assure compliance with NIH/NIDDK policies and network/consortium policies. Further, at the request of the NIDDK Program staff, any other network/consortium-relevant third-party agreements must be shared with NIDDK. Failure to comply with this term may prompt action in accordance with NIH Grants Policy Statement, Section 8.5 titled: “Special Award Conditions and Remedies for Noncompliance (Special Award Conditions and Enforcement Actions)”, and Section 8.5.2, titled: “Remedies for Noncompliance or Enforcement Actions: Suspension, Termination, and Withholding Support”, noncompliance with the terms and conditions of award will be considered by the funding IC for future funding and support decisions and may result in termination of the award.”
  • Any involvement of a third-party (including but not limited to industry, academia, and nonprofit institutions) in the study and network/consortium activities that includes access to any network/consortium generated resources (i.e., data and biosamples), or study results that are not publicly available, or using the name of the network/consortium or study or the name of the NIH or NIDDK, is permitted only after written permission by the NIDDK Program staff who will consult with others at NIH and NIDDK Technology Advancement Office.
  • Recipients must agree to comply with the processes and goals as delineated within the NOFO. 
  • Recipients must share data, materials, models, methods, information and unique research resources that are generated by the projects in concordance with Network/Consortium policies in order to facilitate progress. When appropriate, and in accordance with NIH policies, as well as NIDDK policies, Recipients will be expected to collaborate; share novel reagents, biomaterials, methods and models and resources; and share both positive and negative results that would help guide the research activities of other members.
  • Upon completion or termination of the research project(s), the recipients are responsible for making all study materials and procedures broadly available (e.g., putting them into the public domain) or making them accessible to the research community according to the NIH-approved plan submitted for each project, for making all study materials and procedures available to the scientific community and the NIH for the conduct of research. The Data Management and Sharing Plan should include a plan to accomplish the aforementioned things at the end of the study.
  • Recipients may be asked to scientifically review applications for special opportunity pool funds, as it is deemed appropriate.
  • Recipients will submit a list of milestones to the NIDDK.

NIH staff have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below:

The NIDDK will designate program staff, including a Program Official and a Grants Management Specialist to provide normal program stewardship and administrative oversight of the cooperative agreement. The Program Official and Grants Management Specialist will be named in the Notice of Grant Award (NoA).

  • The NIDDK may invite External Consultants with relevant scientific expertise for the sole purpose of consultative advice on scientific developments and opportunities that may enhance the achievement of the study goals.
  • The NIDDK Project Scientist(s), Project Coordinator, and Program Official may review and approve applications of the Special Opportunity Funds to ensure that they are within the scope of network/consortium research as described in the NOFO and NIH guidelines. 

An NIDDK Project Scientist will be substantially involved in this project above and beyond the normal stewardship of an NIH IC Program Official as follows

1. Serve as the contact point for all facets of the scientific interaction with the recipient(s). As required for the coordination of activities and to expedite progress, NIDDK may designate additional NIDDK staff to provide advice to the recipient on specific scientific and/or analytic issues.

2. For multi-center studies, participate in the Steering Committee that oversees study conduct. The NIDDK Project Scientist 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 Recipients 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 NIDDK Project Scientist or Project Coordinator may coordinate activities among recipients 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 Project Coordinator 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 Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) on a regular basis to monitor study progress. Monitoring may include regular communications with the Program Director/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 ensure 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) participant 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 an independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) as appropriate for Phase III clinical trials or other high-risk studies, or an Observational Study Monitoring Board (OSMB) for observational/epidemiologic studies; these Boards will review study progress, safety data, and interim results, as appropriate, and provide guidance to the NIDDK. The NIDDK Program Official or their Project Coordinator will serve as the Executive Secretary and/or NIDDK program representative on the DSMB/OSMB.

Areas of Joint Responsibility include:

After the award an initial face-to-face meeting between the Project Scientist, other relevant NIDDK/NIH staff, and the recipients will be scheduled. This meeting will have the main purpose of jump starting the project and evaluating and modifying as necessary the proposed milestones.

Steering Committee (SC)

A Steering Committee organized by the HIRN 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 recipients, 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 Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s), (including those of data coordinating/statistical centers, if any) and co-investigator(s) 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.  The NIDDK Program Official may serve as a non-voting member on the SC.

A Chairperson of the Steering Committee will be selected and voted on by the Steering Committee members. The Chairperson provides leadership to the Committee by conducting the Steering Committee meetings and by interacting closely with the recipients during protocol development and implementation. The NIDDK Project Scientist may not serve as Chairperson.  The NIDDK Program Official should be consulted regarding the selection of the Chairperson to provide any feedback regarding concerns regarding potential for bias or conflict of interest or lack of required expertise.

External Consultants 

An independent panel of External Consultants may be established by the HIRN Steering Committee, and meet at least once a year.  The HPAP-T2D External Consultants will periodically review interim progress and give feedback to the HIRN Steering Committee on adjustments and future directions. Members of the panel of External Consultants may be asked, on an ad hoc basis, to participate in the peer review of applications for new research initiatives that utilize special “opportunity pool” funds. The NIDDK Program Official will review the Committee’s selections for potential bias, conflicts of interest, or lack of required expertise. If the NIDDK Program Official has concerns regarding selection of one or more External Consultants which are not satisfactorily resolved, the NIDDK Program Official may withhold concurrence if approved by the Director of NIDDK Division of Extramural Activities based on written justification.  In cases where NIDDK Program Official concurrence is withheld, the Steering Committee will be required to make another selection.

Dispute Resolution

Disagreements that may arise in scientific/technical matter or programmatic matters (within the scope of the award) between award recipients and the NIDDK may be brought to arbitration. The arbitration panel will be composed of the Principal Investigator, one NIH designee, and a third designee from the independent panel of review experts. This special dispute resolution procedures in no way affect the recipient's right to appeal an adverse action in accordance with PHS regulations at 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D, and HHS regulations at 45 CFR Part 16.

3. Data Management and Sharing

Consistent with the 2023 NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing, when data management and sharing is applicable to the award, recipients will be required to adhere to the Data Management and Sharing requirements as outlined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement. Upon the approval of a Data Management and Sharing Plan, it is required for recipients to implement the plan as described.

4. Reporting

When multiple years are involved, recipients will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

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. NIH NOFOs outline intended research goals and objectives. Post award, NIH will review and measure performance based on the details and outcomes that are shared within the RPPR, as described at 2 CFR Part 200.301.

The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 as amended (FFATA), includes a requirement for recipients of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later.  All recipients of applicable NIH grants and cooperative agreements are required to report to the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at on all subawards over the threshold.  See the NIH Grants Policy Statement for additional information on this reporting requirement.

In accordance with the regulatory requirements provided at 2 CFR Part 200.113 and Appendix XII to 2 CFR Part 200, 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 2 CFR Part 200 – Award Term and Condition for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.

Section VII. Agency Contacts

We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.

Application Submission Contacts

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: (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: (preferred method of contact)
Telephone: 301-480-7075 Customer Support (Questions regarding registration and Workspace)
Contact Center Telephone: 800-518-4726

Scientific/Research Contact(s)

Xujing Wang, PhD
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) 
Telephone: 301-451-2862

Peer Review Contact(s)

Ann A. Jerkins, Ph.D.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: 301-594-2242

Financial/Grants Management Contact(s)
Craig Bagdon
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Telephone: 301-594-2115

Section VIII. Other Information

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.

Authority and Regulations

Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 2 CFR Part 200.

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