National Institutes of Health (NIH)
Office of The Director, National Institutes of Health (OD)
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)
National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI)
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA)
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD)
National Library of Medicine (NLM)
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
All applications to this funding opportunity announcement should fall within the mission of the Institutes/Centers. The following NIH Offices may co-fund applications assigned to those Institutes/Centers.
Office of Research on Women's Health (ORWH)
Note: Not all NIH Institutes, Centers, and Offices (ICOs) participate in Announcements. Refer to NIH Institute, Center, and Office Grants & Funding Profiles for ICO-specific missions, interest areas, priorities, and funding considerations. ICOs that do not participate in this announcement will not consider applications for funding.
P01 Research Program Projects
Through this Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), the participating NIH Institutes, Centers, and Offices (ICOs) invite applications for the investigator-initiated Program Project (P01). A P01 supports a broadly based, multidisciplinary research program with a specific major scientific objective or theme. The proposed Program Projects are focused on the programmatic interests of one or more of the participating ICOs based on their scientific missions. A program project utilizes research projects with a common central scientific theme, an administrative core, and optional shared resource core(s) to accomplish ICOs' programmatic objectives.
NIH's mission is to seek fundamental knowledge about the nature and behavior of living systems and the application of that knowledge to enhance health, lengthen life, and reduce illness and disability.
The goals of the agency are:
In realizing these goals, the NIH provides leadership and direction to programs designed to improve the health of the Nation by conducting and supporting research:
| 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 |
| November 20, 2026 | November 20, 2026 | Not Applicable | March 2027 | May 2027 | July 2027 |
| January 25, 2027 * | January 25, 2027 * | Not Applicable | July 2027 | October 2027 | December 2027 |
| May 25, 2027 * | May 25, 2027 * | Not Applicable | November 2027 | January 2028 | April 2028 |
| September 25, 2027 * | September 25, 2027 * | Not Applicable | March 2028 | May 2028 | July 2028 |
| January 25, 2028 * | January 25, 2028 * | Not Applicable | July 2028 | October 2028 | December 2028 |
| May 25, 2028 * | May 25, 2028 * | Not Applicable | November 2028 | January 2029 | April 2029 |
| September 25, 2028 * | September 25, 2028 * | Not Applicable | March 2029 | May 2029 | July 2029 |
| January 25, 2029 * | January 25, 2029 * | Not Applicable | July 2029 | October 2029 | December 2029 |
| May 25, 2029 * | May 25, 2029 * | Not Applicable | November 2029 | January 2030 | April 2030 |
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.
Not Applicable
It is critical that applicants follow the Multi-Project (M) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this NOFO or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts). Conformance to all requirements (both in the How to Apply - Application Guide and the NOFO) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the How to Apply - Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions. Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
There are several options available to submit your application through Grants.gov to NIH and Department of Health and Human Services partners. You must use one of these submission options to access the application forms for this opportunity.
Through this NOFO, NIH invites applications proposing multidisciplinary, coordinated research programs that represent the investigators' specific interests and competencies and that fall within the mission of the participating NIH Institutes Centers, and Offices (ICOs). The goal of the Program Project is to support an integrated, collaborative research program composed of interrelated projects that address a well-defined central research focus or objective. Individual research projects should be scientifically meritorious and contribute synergistically to the overall Program, providing added value through scientific integration and collaboration. Refer to NIH Institute, Center, and Office Grants & Funding Profiles for ICO-specific missions, interest areas, priorities, and funding considerations.
This NOFO supports multi-project applications. In the context of a multi-project application, synergy entails cooperative interaction of multiple projects, teams, or resources to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate parts for enhancement of scientific knowledge, ideas, and outcomes. The proposed merger of complementary skills, perspectives, and resources has the potential to produce outcomes greater than would otherwise be achieved. The outcomes resulting from conducting the proposed research as a Program will exceed the outcomes from conducting separate research activities as a single project application. Resources and tools that can help facilitate synergy include, but are not limited to sharing research data, samples, reagents, pathogens, human subject cohort(s), technologies, research approaches, data management/analytical tools, and model organisms.
The following types of studies are not responsive to this NOFO:
Applications proposing such studies will be considered non-responsive and will not be reviewed or considered for funding.
Investigators proposing NIH-defined clinical trials may refer to the Research Methods Resources website for information about developing statistical methods and study designs.
See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.
Grant: A financial assistance mechanism providing money, property, or both to an eligible entity to carry out an approved project or activity.
The OER Glossary and the How to Apply - Application Guide provides details on these application types. Only those application types listed here are allowed for this NOFO.
Optional: Accepting applications that either propose or do not propose clinical trial(s).
The number of awards is contingent upon NIH appropriations and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
Application budgets are not limited but need to reflect the actual needs of the proposed project.
Applicants are strongly encouraged to contact program officials prior to submitting any application and early in the application planning process. Refer to Large Complex Projects Funding Considerations and Contacts for ICO-specific funding information.
The scope of the proposed project 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 from this NOFO.
Higher Education Institutions - Includes all types
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
For-Profit Organizations
Local Governments
Federal Governments
Other
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Organizations) are 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.
NIH will no longer issue awards (i.e., new, renewal, or non-competing continuation) to domestic or foreign entities that involve foreign subawards/subcontracts. All NIH-funded research involving foreign subawards/subcontracts must be submitted in response to a NOFO that is specifically designated for funded international collaborations. See NIH Grants Policy Statement 16.8 Collaborative International Research Awards.
Applications involving foreign subawards/subcontracts submitted in response to this NOFO will be deemed noncompliant and will not be considered for funding. This policy applies to all monetary international collaborations resulting in foreign subawards/subcontracts, however, it does not preclude unfunded international collaborations or foreign components, funding for foreign consultants, or procurement of unique equipment or supplies from foreign vendors.
For foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, only unfunded international collaborations or foreign components, funding for foreign consultants, or procurement of unique equipment or supplies from foreign vendors are allowed.
Applicant organizations
Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the How to Apply- Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as possible. Failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission, please reference NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications for additional information.
Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))
All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account. PD(s)/PI(s) should work with their organizational officials to either create a new account or to affiliate their existing account with the applicant organization in eRA Commons. Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.
All PD(s)/PI(s) must be registered with ORCID. The personal profile associated with the PD(s)/PI(s) eRA Commons account must be linked to a valid ORCID ID. For more information on linking an ORCID ID to an eRA Commons personal profile see the ORCID topic in our eRA Commons online help.
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.
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 How to Apply - Application Guide.
This NOFO does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 1.2- Definitions of Terms.
Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct.
The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time per NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.7.4 Submission of Resubmission Application. This means that the NIH will not accept:
The application forms package specific to this opportunity must be accessed through ASSIST or an institutional system-to-system solution. A button to apply using ASSIST is available in Part 1 of this NOFO. See the administrative office for instructions if planning to use an institutional system-to-system solution.
It is critical that applicants follow the Multi-Project (M) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide, except where instructed in this notice of funding opportunity to do otherwise (in this NOFO, in a policy notice, or other notice from NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts) and where instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide are directly related to the Grants.gov downloadable forms currently used with most NIH opportunities. Conformance to the requirements in the How to Apply - Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
All page limitations described in the How to Apply- Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
| Component | Component Type for Submission | Page Limit | Required/Optional | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | Overall | 12 | Required | 1 | 1 |
| Administrative Core | Admin Core | 6 | Required | 1 | 1 |
| Shared Resources Cores | Core | 6 | Optional | 0 | 5 |
| Research Projects - minimum preferences may vary across ICOs: Applicants are strongly encouraged to consult staff at the intended ICO listed in Section VII. | Project | 12 | Required | 2 | 5 |
The following section supplements the instructions found in How to Apply- Application Guide and should be used for preparing a multi-component application.
Revision applications must include an Overall component and the components that are affected by the revision. Therefore, the component requirements listed below may not apply to the revision application.
The application should consist of the following components:
When preparing the application, use Component Type 'Overall'.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.
Complete entire form.
Follow standard instructions.
Follow standard instructions.
Enter primary site only.
A summary of Project/Performance Sites in the Overall section of the assembled application image in eRA Commons compiled from data collected in the other components will be generated upon submission.
Include only the Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) and any multi-PDs/PIs (if applicable to this NOFO) for the entire application.
A summary of Senior/Key Persons followed by their Biographical Sketches in the Overall section of the assembled application image in eRA Commons will be generated upon submission.
The only budget information included in the Overall component is the Estimated Project Funding section of the SF424 (R&R) Cover.
A PD/PI (whether designated as contact or not) must commit a minimum of 1.8 person-months per year to the award. For applications with multiple PDs/PIs, each PD/PI must commit 1.8 person months per year. The multiple PDs/PIs option is only for the Overall Program Leader(s). The NOFO does not support multiple Project/Core Leaders for individual Projects and Cores. If applicants (multi-PD/PI approach) lead multiple project components, the minimum level of effort is additive. This commitment for PD(s)/PI(s) cannot be reduced in later years of the award. Note that this is a minimum level of effort that should be increased as appropriate to meet the needs of the work.
A budget summary in the Overall section of the assembled application image in eRA Commons compiled from detailed budget data collected in the other components will be generated upon submission.
Introduction to Application: For Resubmission and Revision applications, an Introduction to Application is required in the Overall component.
Specific Aims: Describe the overall goals and specific aims of the Program Project as a whole, and describe the expected impact of the overall Program.
Research Strategy:
The overall Research Strategy section describes the significance and innovation of the Program Project, along with its approach, and should highlight the program's conceptual unity and synergy. It should include a description of the major research objectives and strategic plan, detailing how the proposed projects and shared scientific cores (if proposed) will be coordinated and work together to address the overall goals and aims of the program more effectively than if the projects were conducted independently. The synergistic nature of the proposed projects and shared scientific cores (if proposed) at the overall program level should be described. Include the placement/contribution of each project and core(s) in the overall scheme. The Program Project may include study design and methods that are not by themselves innovative but address innovative hypotheses or important questions and unmet needs, thus making the proposed study conceptually innovative. A description of how the program as a whole will benefit from any unique cohorts and samples, collaborations, or resources should be included, as well as a summary of any special features in the environment and/or resources that make the overall program strong or unique. If the Program involves clinical research, concisely describe overall plans for ensuring feasibility of recruiting sufficient participants from the proposed population(s) to achieve the stated objectives.
Resource Sharing Plan:
Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the How to Apply - Application Guide.
Other Plan(s):
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Appendix:
Only limited items are allowed in the Appendix. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in How to Apply- Application Guide; any instructions provided here are in addition to the How to Apply - Application Guide instructions.
When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the How to Apply - Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered "Yes" to the question "Are Human Subjects Involved?" on the R&R Other Project Information form, there must be at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or a Delayed Onset Study record within the application. The study record(s) must be included in the component(s) where the work is being done, unless the same study spans multiple components. To avoid the creation of duplicate study records, a single study record with sufficient information for all involved components must be included in the Overall component when the same study spans multiple components.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Delayed Onset Study
Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start). All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
When preparing your application, use Component Type 'Admin Core'
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.
Complete only the following fields:
Follow standard instructions.
Human Subjects: Answer only the 'Are Human Subjects Involved?' and 'Is the Project Exempt from Federal regulations?' questions.
Vertebrate Animals: Answer only the 'Are Vertebrate Animals Used?' question.
Project Narrative: Do not complete. Note: ASSIST screens will show an asterisk for this attachment indicating it is required. However, eRA systems only enforce this requirement in the Overall component and applications will not receive an error if omitted in other components.
List all performance sites that apply to the specific component.
Note: The Project Performance Site form allows up to 300 sites, prior to using additional attachment for additional entries.
Budget forms appropriate for the specific component will be included in the application package.
A Core Lead must commit a minimum of 1.2 person-months per year to the Administrative Core. This commitment cannot be reduced in later years of the award. Note that this is a minimum level of effort that should be increased as appropriate to meet the needs of the work.
Note: The R&R Budget form included in many of the component types allows for up to 100 Senior/Key Persons in section A and 100 Equipment Items in section C prior to using attachments for additional entries. All other SF424 (R&R) instructions apply.
Specific Aims: List in priority order, the broad, long-range objectives and goals of the proposed Administrative Core. In addition, state the Core's relationship to the proposed Program's goals and how it is related to the component Research Projects and Core(s) in the application.
Research Strategy: The institution and the Core Lead are responsible for the application and collaborative research activities. Explain the plans for organizational and administrative management of the overall program, and for coordination and communication within the program. Explain the methods that will be used for monitoring progress in the projects and effective use of the shared resource cores. Explain the plans for internal quality control of ongoing research, management of day-to-day program activities, and a plan for resolution of disputes. Describe how the Core Lead's administrative, management, and leadership capabilities adequately provide for: internal quality control of ongoing research, management of day-to-day program activities, and management of contractual agreements. Describe communication and cooperation among program leaders and/or project investigators, plans for resolution of disputes, development of scientific meetings and allocation of funds as applicable.
Depending on the nature of the Program, the Core may include the use of (a) an external advisory council (EAC) that is charged to provide appropriate and objective advice and evaluation, as needed, to the PD/PI; and/or (b) an internal advisory council (IAC), to advise on decision-making, and priority setting process to support the activities of the Program. If applicable, describe the expertise and responsibilities of the potential External Advisory Committee members.
For new applications, do not contact, recruit, or name potential external advisory council members in the application, only describe the expertise and responsibilities needed for the potential external advisory council members.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the How to Apply- Application Guide.
Other Plan(s):
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Appendix:
Only limited items are allowed in the Appendix. Follow all instructions for the How to Apply- Application Guide; any instructions provided here are in addition to those in the How to Apply- Application Guide instructions.
When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the How to Apply- Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered "Yes" to the question "Are Human Subjects Involved?" on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or a Delayed Onset Study record.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
Delayed Onset Study
Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start). All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
When preparing your application, use Component Type 'Core'
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.
Complete only the following fields:
Follow standard instructions.
Human Subjects: Answer only the 'Are Human Subjects Involved?' and 'Is the Project Exempt from Federal regulations?' questions.
Vertebrate Animals: Answer only the 'Are Vertebrate Animals Used?' question.
Project Narrative: Do not complete. Note: ASSIST screens will show an asterisk for this attachment indicating it is required. However, eRA systems only enforce this requirement in the Overall component and applications will not receive an error if omitted in other components.
List all performance sites that apply to the specific component.
Note: The Project Performance Site form allows up to 300 sites, prior to using additional attachment for additional entries.
Budget forms appropriate for the specific component will be included in the application package.
A Shared Resource Core Lead must commit a minimum of 0.6 person months per year to the Core. This commitment cannot be reduced in later years of the award. Note that this is a minimum level of effort that should be increased as appropriate to meet the needs of the work. Applicants should justify minimum effort, based on the proposed activities of the Core
Note: The R&R Budget form included in many of the component types allows for up to 100 Senior/Key Persons in section A and 100 Equipment Items in section C prior to using attachments for additional entries. All other SF424 (R&R) instructions apply.
Specific Aims: List in priority order, the broad, long-range objectives, and goals of the proposed Shared Resource Core(s). In addition, state the Shared Resource Core's relationship to the proposed Program goals and how it relates to the individual Research Projects and other Share Resource Core(s), if applicable, in the application. If proposed, the Shared Resource Core(s) must support at least two Research Projects.
Research Strategy: Describe the function of the Shared Resource Core (s) as a resource to the Program Project. Describe the facilities, techniques, and skills the Shared Resource Core will provide and the role of the Core Leader and each key participant. Explain why the inclusion of this Shared Resource Core is essential to one or more of the individual research Projects and to the entire Program. Provide justification for the essential nature of this Shared Resource Core for the Program. Address issues such as quality control, procedures for selecting projects that use the core, cost-effectiveness, and increased efficiency. Hypothesis-driven aims are not required for Scientific Cores. Research activities should only be conducted in the research projects.
Shared Resource Cores should not simply duplicate resources already available at the institution. If the Shared Resource Core augments an existing shared resource, describe how this Shared Resource Core augments or complements the existing resource.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the How to Apply- Application Guide.
Other Plan(s):
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Appendix:
Only limited items are allowed in the Appendix. Follow all instructions for the How to Apply- Application Guide; any instructions provided here are in addition to those in the How to Apply- Application Guide instructions.
When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the How to Apply- Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered "Yes" to the question "Are Human Subjects Involved?" on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or a Delayed Onset Study record.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
Delayed Onset Study
Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start). All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
When preparing your application, use Component Type 'Project'
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as noted.
Complete only the following fields:
Follow standard instructions.
Human Subjects: Answer only the 'Are Human Subjects Involved?' and 'Is the Project Exempt from Federal regulations?' questions.
Vertebrate Animals: Answer only the 'Are Vertebrate Animals Used?' question.
Project Narrative: Do not complete. Note: ASSIST screens will show an asterisk for this attachment indicating it is required. However, eRA systems only enforce this requirement in the Overall component and applications will not receive an error if omitted in other components.
List all performance sites that apply to the specific component.
Note: The Project Performance Site form allows up to 300 sites, prior to using additional attachment for additional entries.
Budget forms appropriate for the specific component will be included in the application package.
A Project Lead must commit a minimum of 1.8 person-months per year to the project. This commitment cannot be reduced in later years of the award. Note that this is a minimum level of effort that should be increased as appropriate to meet the needs of the work.
Note: The R&R Budget form included in many of the component types allows for up to 100 Senior/Key Persons in section A and 100 Equipment Items in section C prior to using attachments for additional entries. All other SF424 (R&R) instructions apply.
Specific Aims: List the broad long-range objectives and goals of the proposed research project. Concisely and realistically describe the hypothesis or hypotheses to be tested. In addition, state the individual project's relationship to the Program's goals and how it is synergistic to other projects and relevant cores.
Research Strategy: The Research Strategy should be organized into sections on Significance, Innovation, and Approach. The Significance section should include discussion of how this project relates to overall program goals. State the significance of the research, indicating the project's relevance to the primary theme of the application. Describe how the proposed study is innovative, which may include innovative hypotheses (sis) and/or a study design and methods that are not by themselves innovative but address important questions or unmet needs. Explain the rationale for selecting the methods to accomplish the specific aims.
Each research project must interact with other research projects of the Program and also, interact with the Administrative Core and Shared Resource Core(s) (if proposed). Individual research projects should describe the interactions with other Research Projects and Core(s) of the Program and explain the expected impact of those interactions on the overall goals of the Program. However, the Research Strategy section should focus on the specific Project and not the potential synergy between this Project and the other projects and cores. Synergy should be discussed in the Overall Component.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the How to Apply- Application Guide.
Other Plan(s):
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Appendix:
Only limited items are allowed in the Appendix. Follow all instructions for the How to Apply- Application Guide; any instructions provided here are in addition to those in the How to Apply- Application Guide instructions.
When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the How to Apply- Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:
If you answered "Yes" to the question "Are Human Subjects Involved?" on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or a Delayed Onset Study record.
Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information
All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
Delayed Onset Study
Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start). All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.
Foreign (non-U.S.) organizations must follow policies described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, and procedures for foreign institutions described throughout the How to Apply - Application Guide.
See Part 2. Section III.1 for information regarding the requirement for obtaining a unique entity identifier and for completing and maintaining active registrations in System for Award Management (SAM), NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code (if applicable), eRA Commons, and Grants.gov
Part I. contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission. When a submission date falls on a weekend or Federal holiday, the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day.
Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies) using ASSIST or other electronic submission systems. Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH's electronic system for grants administration. NIH and Grants.gov systems check the application against many of the application instructions upon submission. Errors must be corrected and a changed/corrected application must be submitted to Grants.gov on or before the application due date and time. If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late. Applications that miss the due date and time are subjected to the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications.
Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.
Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in How to Apply- Application Guide.
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 7.9.1 Selected Items of Cost.
Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the How to Apply - Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.
For information on how applications will be automatically assembled for review and funding consideration after submission, refer to: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/ElectronicReceipt/files/Electronic_Multi-project_Application_Image_Assembly.pdf.
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) and component Project Leads 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.
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 How to Apply - Application Guide.
See more tips for avoiding common errors.
Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with application instructions by the Center for Scientific Review and responsiveness by components of participating organizations, NIH. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed.
Recipients or subrecipients must submit any information related to violations of federal criminal law involving fraud, bribery, or gratuity violations potentially affecting the federal award. See Mandatory Disclosures, 2 CFR 200.113 and NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 4.1.35.
Send written disclosures to the NIH Chief Grants Management Officer listed on the Notice of Award for the IC that funded the award and to the HHS Office of Inspector Grant Self Disclosure Program at grantdisclosures@oig.hhs.gov.
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy.
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. Applications submitted to NIH in support of the NIH mission are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.
Reviewers will provide an overall Impact Score for the entire P01 application. The overall Impact Score will reflect the scientific merit, synergy and integration of Research Projects and Cores, and the scientific impact of the program provided by inclusion of each component. In addition, reviewers will consider each of the review criteria in the determination of scientific merit and give a separate score for each. Reviewers will provide an evaluation of the Administrative Core and any Shared Resource Core(s) and provide a separate overall impact score for each Core. Each Research Project will be evaluated on scientific merit and how inclusion of the Research Project within the Overall Program offers a distinct advantage or scientific gain over pursuing the Project independently. Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria in the determination of scientific merit and give a separate score for each and will provide an overall impact score for each Research Project.
A proposed Clinical Trial application may include study design, methods, and intervention that are not by themselves innovative but address important questions or unmet needs. Additionally, the results of the clinical trial may indicate that further clinical development of the intervention is unwarranted or lead to new avenues of scientific investigation.
Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project rigorous? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
Are the scientific rationale and need for a clinical trial to test the proposed hypothesis or intervention well supported by preliminary data, clinical and/or preclinical studies, or information in the literature or knowledge of biological mechanisms? For trials focusing on clinical or public health endpoints, is this clinical trial necessary for testing the safety, efficacy or effectiveness of an intervention that could lead to a change in clinical practice, community behaviors or health care policy? For trials focusing on mechanistic, behavioral, physiological, biochemical, or other biomedical endpoints, is this trial needed to advance scientific understanding?
Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or those in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
With regard to the proposed leadership for the project, do the PD/PI(s) and key personnel have the expertise, experience, and ability to organize, manage and implement the proposed clinical trial and meet milestones and timelines? Do they have appropriate expertise in study coordination, data management and statistics? For a multicenter trial, is the organizational structure appropriate and does the application identify a core of potential center investigators and staffing for a coordinating center?
Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
Does the design/research plan include innovative elements, as appropriate, that enhance its sensitivity, potential for information or potential to advance scientific knowledge or clinical practice?
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have the investigators included plans to address weaknesses in the rigor of prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?
If the project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, are the plans to address:
1) the protection of human subjects from research risks, and
2) inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults), justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
Does the application adequately address the following, if applicable
Study Design
Is the study design justified and appropriate to address primary and secondary outcome variable(s)/endpoints that will be clear, informative and relevant to the hypothesis being tested? Is the scientific rationale/premise of the study based on previously well-designed preclinical and/or clinical research? Given the methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions, is the study design adequately powered to answer the research question(s), test the proposed hypothesis/hypotheses, and provide interpretable results? Is the trial appropriately designed to conduct the research efficiently? Are the study populations (size, sex, age, demographic group), proposed intervention arms/dose, and duration of the trial, appropriate and well justified?
Are potential ethical issues adequately addressed? Is the process for obtaining informed consent or assent appropriate? Is the eligible population available? Are the plans for recruitment outreach, enrollment, retention, handling dropouts, missed visits, and losses to follow-up appropriate to ensure robust data collection? Are the planned recruitment timelines feasible and is the plan to monitor accrual adequate? Has the need for randomization (or not), masking (if appropriate), controls, and inclusion/exclusion criteria been addressed? Are differences addressed, if applicable, in the intervention effect due to sex and race/ethnicity?
Are the plans to standardize, assure quality of, and monitor adherence to, the trial protocol and data collection or distribution guidelines appropriate? Is there a plan to obtain required study agent(s)? Does the application propose to use existing available resources, as applicable?
Data Management and Statistical Analysis
Are planned analyses and statistical approach appropriate for the proposed study design and methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions? Are the procedures for data management and quality control of data adequate at clinical site(s) or at center laboratories, as applicable? Have the methods for standardization of procedures for data management to assess the effect of the intervention and quality control been addressed? Is there a plan to complete data analysis within the proposed period of the award?
Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
If proposed, are the administrative, data coordinating, enrollment and laboratory/testing centers, appropriate for the trial proposed?
Does the application adequately address the capability and ability to conduct the trial at the proposed site(s) or centers? Are the plans to add or drop enrollment centers, as needed, appropriate?
If international site(s) is/are proposed, does the application adequately address the complexity of executing the clinical trial?
If multi-sites/centers, is there evidence of the ability of the individual site or center to: (1) enroll the proposed numbers; (2) adhere to the protocol; (3) collect and transmit data in an accurate and timely fashion; and, (4) operate within the proposed organizational structure?
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give separate scores for these items.
Specific to applications involving clinical trials
Is the study timeline described in detail, taking into account start-up activities, the anticipated rate of enrollment, and planned follow-up assessment? Is the projected timeline feasible and well justified? Does the project incorporate efficiencies and utilize existing resources (e.g., CTSAs, practice-based research networks, electronic medical records, administrative database, or patient registries) to increase the efficiency of participant enrollment and data collection, as appropriate?
Are potential challenges and corresponding solutions discussed (e.g., strategies that can be implemented in the event of enrollment shortfalls)?
For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.
When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.
The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following three points: (1) a complete description of all proposed procedures including the species, strains, ages, sex, and total numbers of animals to be used; (2) justifications that the species is appropriate for the proposed research and why the research goals cannot be accomplished using an alternative non-animal model; and (3) interventions including analgesia, anesthesia, sedation, palliative care, and humane endpoints that will be used to limit any unavoidable discomfort, distress, pain and injury in the conduct of scientifically valuable research. Methods of euthanasia and justification for selected methods, if NOT consistent with the American Veterinary Medicine Association (AVMA) Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals, is also required but is found in a separate section of the application. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals Section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animals Section.
Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.
For Resubmissions (as applicable), the committee will evaluate the application as now presented, taking into consideration the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group and changes made to the project.
For Renewals (as applicable), the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.
For Revisions (as applicable), the committee will consider the appropriateness of the proposed expansion of the scope of the project. If the Revision application relates to a specific line of investigation presented in the original application that was not recommended for approval by the committee, then the committee will consider whether the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group are adequate and whether substantial changes are clearly evident.
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.
Review Criteria for Administrative Core: Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the component to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria.
Review Criteria for Shared Resources Core(s) (if applicable): Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the component to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria.
Review Criteria for Individual Research Projects:
Overall Impact - Research Projects
Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for each Research 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 Research Project proposed).
Scored Review Criteria for Research Projects
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit and give a separate score for each. A Research Project does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a Research Project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.
Significance
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed program rigorous? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
Are the scientific rationale and need for a clinical trial to test the proposed hypothesis or intervention well supported by preliminary data, clinical and/or preclinical studies, or information in the literature or knowledge of biological mechanisms? For trials focusing on clinical or public health endpoints, is this clinical trial necessary for testing the safety, efficacy or effectiveness of an intervention that could lead to a change in clinical practice, community behaviors or health care policy? For trials focusing on mechanistic, behavioral, physiological, biochemical, or other biomedical endpoints, is this trial needed to advance scientific understanding?
Investigator(s)
Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well-suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or those in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance, and organizational structure appropriate for the project?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
With regard to the proposed leadership for the project, do the PD/PI(s) and key personnel have the expertise, experience, and ability to organize, manage and implement the proposed clinical trial and meet milestones and timelines? Do they have appropriate expertise in study coordination, data management and statistics? For a multicenter trial, is the organizational structure appropriate and does the application identify a core of potential center investigators and staffing for a coordinating center?
Innovation
Does the project challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
Does the design/research plan include innovative elements, as appropriate, that enhance its sensitivity, potential for information or potential to advance scientific knowledge or clinical practice?
Approach
Are the overall strategies, methodologies, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have investigators included plans to address weaknesses in the rigor of prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed program? 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 Program 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) as required by statute, inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults), justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
Does the application adequately address the following, if applicable
Study Design
Is the study design justified and appropriate to address primary and secondary outcome variable(s)/endpoints that will be clear, informative and relevant to the hypothesis being tested? Is the scientific rationale/premise of the study based on previously well-designed preclinical and/or clinical research? Given the methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions, is the study design adequately powered to answer the research question(s), test the proposed hypothesis/hypotheses, and provide interpretable results? Is the trial appropriately designed to conduct the research efficiently? Are the study populations (size, sex, age, demographic group), proposed intervention arms/dose, and duration of the trial, appropriate and well justified?
Are potential ethical issues adequately addressed? Is the process for obtaining informed consent or assent appropriate? Is the eligible population available? Are the plans for recruitment outreach, enrollment, retention, handling dropouts, missed visits, and losses to follow-up appropriate to ensure robust data collection? Are the planned recruitment timelines feasible and is the plan to monitor accrual adequate? Has the need for randomization (or not), masking (if appropriate), controls, and inclusion/exclusion criteria been addressed? Are differences addressed, if applicable, in the intervention effect due to sex and race/ethnicity?
Are the plans to standardize, assure quality of, and monitor adherence to, the trial protocol and data collection or distribution guidelines appropriate? Is there a plan to obtain required study agent(s)? Does the application propose to use existing available resources, as applicable?
Data Management and Statistical Analysis
Are planned analyses and statistical approach appropriate for the proposed study design and methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions? Are the procedures for data management and quality control of data adequate at clinical site(s) or at center laboratories, as applicable? Have the methods for standardization of procedures for data management to assess the effect of the intervention and quality control been addressed? Is there a plan to complete data analysis within the proposed period of the award?
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?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
If proposed, are the administrative, data coordinating, enrollment and laboratory/testing centers, appropriate for the trial proposed?
Does the application adequately address the capability and ability to conduct the trial at the proposed site(s) or centers? Are the plans to add or drop enrollment centers, as needed, appropriate?
If international site(s) is/are proposed, does the application adequately address the complexity of executing the clinical trial?
If multi-sites/centers, is there evidence of the ability of the individual site or center to: (1) enroll the proposed numbers; (2) adhere to the protocol; (3) collect and transmit data in an accurate and timely fashion; and, (4) operate within the proposed organizational structure?
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give separate scores for these items.
Study Timeline
Specific to applications involving clinical trials
Is the study timeline described in detail, taking into account start-up activities, the anticipated rate of enrollment, and planned follow-up assessment? Is the projected timeline feasible and well justified? Does the project incorporate efficiencies and utilize existing resources (e.g., CTSAs, practice-based research networks, electronic medical records, administrative database, or patient registries) to increase the efficiency of participant enrollment and data collection, as appropriate?
Are potential challenges and corresponding solutions discussed (e.g., strategies that can be implemented in the event of enrollment shortfalls)?
Protections for Human Subjects
For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.
Inclusion of Human Subjects Policies
When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.
Vertebrate Animals
The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following three points: (1) a complete description of all proposed procedures including the species, strains, ages, sex, and total numbers of animals to be used; (2) justifications that the species is appropriate for the proposed research and why the research goals cannot be accomplished using an alternative non-animal model; and (3) interventions including analgesia, anesthesia, sedation, palliative care, and humane endpoints that will be used to limit any unavoidable discomfort, distress, pain and injury in the conduct of scientifically valuable research. Methods of euthanasia and justification for selected methods, if NOT consistent with the American Veterinary Medicine Association (AVMA) Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals, is also required but is found in a separate section of the application. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals Section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animals Section.
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.
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 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.
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 Resource Sharing Plan(s) (e.g., Sharing Model Organisms) or the rationale for not sharing the resources, is reasonable.
Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources:
For projects involving key biological and/or chemical resources, reviewers will comment on the brief plans proposed for identifying and ensuring the validity of those resources.
Budget and Period of Support
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by the Center for Scientific Review (CSR), in accordance with NIH peer review policies and practices, using the stated review criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA Commons.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications will receive a written critique.
Applications may undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit (generally the top half of applications under review) will be discussed and assigned an overall impact score.
Applications will be assigned on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the appropriate national Advisory Council or Board. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.5.1. Just-in-Time Procedures. This request is not a Notice of Award nor should it be construed to be an indicator of possible funding.
Prior to making an award, NIH reviews an applicant's federal award history in SAM.gov to ensure sound business practices. An applicant can review and comment on any information in the Responsibility/Qualification records available in SAM.gov. NIH will consider any comments by the applicant in the Responsibility/Qualification records in SAM.gov to ascertain the applicant's integrity, business ethics, and performance record of managing Federal awards per 2 CFR Part 200.206 "Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants." This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.
After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access their 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.
A Notice of Award (NoA) is the official authorizing document notifying the applicant that an award has been made and that funds may be requested from the designated HHS payment system or office. The NoA is signed by the Grants Management Officer and emailed to the recipient's business official.
In accepting the award, the recipient agrees that any activities under the award are subject to all provisions currently in effect or implemented during the period of the award, other Department regulations and policies in effect at the time of the award, and applicable statutory provisions.
Recipients must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.6. Funding Restrictions. Any pre-award costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the applicant's own risk. For more information on the Notice of Award, please refer to the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 5. The Notice of Award and NIH Grants & Funding website, see Award Process.
Individual awards are based on the application submitted to, and as approved by, the NIH and are subject to the IC-specific terms and conditions identified in the NoA.
ClinicalTrials.gov: If an award provides for one or more clinical trials. By law (Title VIII, Section 801 of Public Law 110-85), the "responsible party" must register and submit results information for certain "applicable clinical trials" on the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System Information Website (https://register.clinicaltrials.gov). NIH expects registration and results reporting of all trials whether required under the law or not. For more information, see https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/reporting/index.htm
Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee Approval: Recipient organizations must ensure that all protocols are reviewed by their IRB or IEC. To help ensure the safety of participants enrolled in NIH-funded studies, the recipient must provide NIH copies of documents related to all major changes in the status of ongoing protocols.
Data and Safety Monitoring Requirements: The NIH policy for data and safety monitoring requires oversight and monitoring of all NIH-conducted or -supported human biomedical and behavioral intervention studies (clinical trials) to ensure the safety of participants and the validity and integrity of the data. Further information concerning these requirements is found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/hs/data_safety.htm and in the application instructions (SF424 (R&R) and PHS 398).
Investigational New Drug or Investigational Device Exemption Requirements: Consistent with federal regulations, clinical research projects involving the use of investigational therapeutics, vaccines, or other medical interventions (including licensed products and devices for a purpose other than that for which they were licensed) in humans under a research protocol must be performed under a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigational new drug (IND) or investigational device exemption (IDE).
Recipient-selected projects that involve {clinical trials or studies involving greater than minimal risk to human subjects} require prior approval by NIH prior to initiation.
The following Federal wide and HHS-specific policy requirements apply to awards funded through NIH:
All federal statutes and regulations relevant to federal financial assistance, including those highlighted in NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 4 Public Policy Requirements, Objectives and Other Appropriation Mandates.
By applying for or accepting federal funds from HHS, recipients certify compliance with all federal antidiscrimination laws and these requirements and that complying with those laws is a material condition of receiving federal funding streams. Recipients are responsible for ensuring subrecipients, contractors, and partners also comply.
Applicants and recipients are strongly encouraged to refer to the NIH Director's Statement of Priorities, entitled "Advancing NIH's Mission Through a Unified Strategy."
Recipients are responsible for ensuring that their activities comply with all applicable federal regulations. Pursuant to 2 CFR 200.340, by accepting an NIH award, the recipient agrees that continued funding for the award is contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds, recipient satisfactory performance, compliance with the Terms and Conditions of the award, and may also otherwise be terminated, to the extent authorized by law, if the agency determines that the award no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities, in line with 2 CFR 200.340(a)(4).
Pursuant to the Cybersecurity Act of 2015, Div. N, § 405, Pub. Law 114-113, 6 USC § 1533(d), the HHS Secretary has established a common set of voluntary, consensus-based, and industry-led guidelines, best practices, methodologies, procedures, and processes.
Successful recipients under this NOFO agree that:
When recipients, subrecipients, or third-party entities have:
Cybersecurity plans and procedures must at minimum include the following:
All activities proposed in your application and budget narrative must align with applicable law, including but not limited to statutes, executive orders, federal regulations and applicable judicial holdings. Accordingly, discretionary awards shall not be used to fund, promote, encourage, subsidize, or facilitate; racial preferences or other forms of racial discrimination by the recipient, including activities where race or intentional proxies for race will be used as a selection criterion for employment or program participation; denial by the recipient of the sex binary in humans, or the belief that sex is a chosen or mutable characteristic; illegal immigration; or any other initiatives that compromise public safety. If an application does not align, the application will not receive funding to the extent permitted by law and applicable court orders.
For applications involving substance abuse, the application must not support harm reduction. Please see Updated Funding Guidance for Recipients on Supplies and Services.
For applications involving funding Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) or medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), this funding should be used to provide comprehensive treatment and recovery support services rather than medication-only models for opioid use disorder. Services should include medications, where clinically indicated, in conjunction with psychosocial and other treatment and recovery support services. Funding can also be used to support individualized tapering and discontinuation of medications when clinically indicated. Please see Updated Funding Guidance for Recipients on MAT/MOUD.
Recipients of both Clinical Trial Required and Clinical Trial Optional awards subject to this term shall report standardized clinical trial activation and enrollment performance data for any interventional clinical trial supported under the award. These metrics are intended to assess trial startup efficiency, site activation, and post-activation performance and to support continuous quality improvement in clinical trial operations (see supplemental guidance). Recipients shall report required data annually at the time of Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) submission on clinical trial activation and enrollment performance milestone dates as calendar dates; NIH will calculate standardized interval metrics from these dates.
Institutions are expected to maintain capabilities that support efficient clinical trial startup, participant enrollment, and performance monitoring, including streamlined workflows and systems for electronic tracking of milestones. Recipients are encouraged to implement and evaluate approaches that improve trial efficiency and the participant experience.
As of October 1, 2025, HHS has adopted 2 CFR Part 200, with some modifications included in 2 CFR Part 300. These regulations replace those in 45 CFR Part 75. However, for NIH, under the Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY 2026, (P.L. 119-75, Division B, Title II, Sec. 224), the provisions relating to indirect costs in 45 CFR 75 continue to apply to NIH awards. Consistent with the statute, NIH will not apply updated thresholds outlined within 2 CFR Part 200, at this time.
In administering programs under this and all funding announcements, NIH prioritizes:
Not Applicable
A Data Management and Sharing Plan (DMS Plan) is required for any NIH-funded or conducted research that will generate scientific data. Applicants must submit the DMS Plan at the time of application using the NIH DMS Plan Format Page. The DMS Plan must address the elements in the structured format. Where the DMS Plan Format Page requires a "Yes or No" response, no additional narrative is allowed. The Data Management and Sharing (DMS) Plan must be provided in the Overall component.
A final RPPR, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 8.6 Closeout. NIH NOFOs outline intended research goals and objectives. Post award, NIH will review and measure performance based on the details and outcomes that are shared within the RPPR, as described at 2 CFR Part 200.301.
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
eRA Service Desk - Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, and post-submission issues.
Grants.gov Support Center - Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and services (e.g., Workspace, subscriptions).
Participating NIH Institutes and Centers are listed in "Components of Participating Organizations" in Part 1. Overview. Refer to Large Complex Projects Funding Considerations and Contacts for ICO-specific funding information.
Examine your eRA Commons account for review assignment and contact information (information appears two weeks after the submission due date).
Participating NIH Institutes and Centers are listed in "Components of Participating Organizations" in Part 1. Overview. Refer to Large Complex Projects Funding Considerations and Contacts for ICO-specific funding 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.
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.