RFA-RM-13-015 (Coordination & Evaluation Center)

OMB #0925-0747
EXP. 11/2019

Attachment 4:
RFA-RM-13-015 (Coordination & Evaluation Center)

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

1 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

Department of Health and Human
Services Part 1. Overview Information
Participating
Organization(s)

National Institutes of Health (NIH)

Components of
Participating
Organizations

This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) is developed as a Common
Fund initiative (http://commonfund.nih.gov/) through the NIH Office of the
Director, Office of Strategic Coordination (http://dpcpsi.nih.gov/osc/). The
FOA will be administered by the National Institute on Minority Health and
Health Disparities (NIMHD) on behalf of the NIH.

Funding
Opportunity Title

NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for
Enhancing the Diversity of the NIH-Funded
Workforce Program (U54)

Activity Code

U54 Specialized Center- Cooperative Agreement

Announcement
Type

New

Related Notices

January 10, 2014 - See Notice NOT-RM-14-005. Notice of Change to
Application Due Date.
January 3, 2014 - See Notice NOT-RM-14-002. Notice of Technical
Assistance Webinar.

Funding
Opportunity
Announcement
(FOA) Number

RFA-RM-13-015

Companion Funding
Opportunity

RFA-RM-13-016, U54 Specialized Center - Cooperative Agreements
RFA-RM-13-017, U54 Specialized Center - Cooperative Agreements

Number of
Applications

Only one application per institution is allowed, as defined in Section III. 3.
Additional Information on Eligibility.

Catalog of Federal
Domestic
Assistance (CFDA)
Number(s)

93.310

Funding
Opportunity
Purpose

The purpose of this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) is to
encourage institutions with expertise in data coordination and evaluation of
research training, career development, and mentoring programs to submit
applications for the establishment and operation of the Coordination and
Evaluation Center (CEC) for the NIH Enhancing the Diversity of the
NIH-Funded Workforce Program. This program will consist of three
integrated initiatives: the Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD)
initiative, the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) and the CEC.
Awardees funded through these initiatives will work together as a consortium
which will be coordinated by the CEC. The CEC will facilitate the
establishment of program-wide goals and agreed upon hallmarks of
successful biomedical researchers at multiple career stages. The CEC will

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

2 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

develop appropriate instruments and processes to assess the impact of
BUILD and NRMN activities on attainment of these hallmarks by program
participants. It will coordinate the collection of data from BUILD and NRMN
awardees and other sources, assess the data in an ongoing way, provide
feedback to the consortium and facilitate an iterative process of program
adjustment to maximize the research benefit of BUILD and NRMN activities.

Key Dates
Posted Date

December 19, 2013

Letter of Intent
Due Date(s)

(Extended to March 2, 2014 per NOT-RM-14-005), Originally February 18,
2014

Application Due
Date(s)

(Extended to April 2, 2014 per NOT-RM-14-005), Originally March 18, 2014

AIDS Application
Due Date(s)

Not Applicable

Scientific Merit
Review

June/July 2014

Advisory Council
Review

August 2014

Earliest Start Date

September 2014

Expiration Date

(Extended to April 3, 2014 per NOT-RM-14-005), Originally March 19, 2014

Due Dates for E.O.
12372

Not Applicable

Required Application Instructions
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide except where instructed to do
otherwise (in this FOA or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts). Conformance to all
requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. While some links are
provided, 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.
Note: A new version of the paper PHS 398 application form and instructions (revised 8/2012) must
now be used. Download the new application form and instructions from http: //grants.nih.gov/grants
/forms.htm.

Table of Contents
Part 1. Overview Information
Part 2. Full Text of Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
Section II. Award Information
Section III. Eligibility Information
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
Section V. Application Review Information
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Section VII. Agency Contacts

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

3 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

Section VIII. Other Information

Part 2. Full Text of Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
Background
The NIH recognizes a unique and compelling need to promote diversity in the NIH-funded biomedical, behavioral,
clinical, and social sciences (collectively termed "biomedical") research workforce. The NIH expects efforts that
diversify the workforce to lead to the recruitment of the most talented researchers from all groups, improve the
quality of the training environment, balance and broaden the perspective in setting research priorities, improve
the ability to recruit subjects from diverse backgrounds into clinical research protocols, and improve the Nation's
capacity to address and eliminate health disparities.
With this need in mind, the NIH Director requested input from the NIH Advisory Committee to the Director (ACD)
regarding actions that the NIH should take to make transformative progress in this area. In 2012, the ACD
Working Group on Diversity in the Biomedical Research Workforce explored ways to improve the recruitment of
individuals from diverse backgrounds underrepresented in biomedical research, sustain their interest in, and
prepare them for, successful biomedical research careers. (These individuals include persons from
underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, people with disabilities, and people from disadvantaged
backgrounds; see http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/showpub.cfm?TopID=2&SubID=27, and the latest NSF report on
Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering, http://www.nsf.gov/statistics
/women/.) The Working Group provided recommendations, endorsed by the ACD, about how to develop and
support individuals from diverse backgrounds across the lifespan of a research career, from undergraduate study
to acquisition of tenure in an academic position or the equivalent in a non-academic setting. In response to these
recommendations, NIH has established the Common Fund Program "Enhancing the Diversity of the NIH-Funded
Workforce” (see http://commonfund.nih.gov/diversity/).
This Common Fund program is envisioned as a national collaborative forum through which awardee institutions,
in partnership with the NIH, will develop and implement novel and innovative programs to engage individuals
from diverse backgrounds and help them prepare for and succeed in biomedical research careers. This program
is being developed in the context of existing programs through which NIH and other entities have made
significant investments to engage scientists using a variety of training and mentoring approaches. Although
existing programs may show positive outcomes for trainees and participants, progress towards achieving a more
diverse NIH-funded workforce is still insufficient.
This program provides an opportunity to understand and address multi-dimensional factors (e.g., institutional,
social, and individual levels) that strongly influence student success, professional development, and persistence
within biomedical research career paths. It will build upon and move beyond existing programs and paradigms to
support transformative approaches to student engagement, research training, mentoring, faculty development,
and infrastructure development. Transformative approaches are ultimately expected to supplant less effective
practices and methods to have a broad and sustained impact on the diversity of the NIH-funded biomedical
research workforce.
Relevant questions for this funding opportunity include, but are not limited to:
What are the hallmarks of a successful biomedical research career at each phase of the training process? What
motivates students to enter biomedical research career paths, and what factors contribute to their sustained
participation? What factors (e.g., institutional, social, and individual) influence emerging scientists, particularly
those from underrepresented backgrounds, to enter, exit, or sustain a biomedical research career, and how can
these factors be addressed? What must happen during different training stages to ensure that trainees,
particularly those from underrepresented backgrounds, develop the skills, knowledge, and competencies
essential to successful biomedical careers, and careers in the NIH-funded biomedical research workforce? How
do institutional structures and resources facilitate successful research training and professional development

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

4 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

activities? How can approaches be designed so that their impact continues beyond the period of NIH funding?
The program will consist of three highly integrated initiatives, in which awardees will work together as
the Diversity Program Consortium:
The Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) Initiative:
Various approaches to increase undergraduate student persistence in the STEM-related fields have been
implemented (Graham et al., Science, 341, 1455-1456). Student participation in research experiences has
been associated with improved academic performance and sustained interest in research careers in the
basic and biomedical sciences (for example, see Fechheimer et al., CBE--Life Sciences Education,
10, 156-163 and Russell et al., Science, 316 (5824), 548-549). Recognizing this approach, BUILD awards
should emphasize research opportunities for students in a multi-pronged approach to enhance diversity in
the NIH research workforce. Institutions are encouraged to consider additional innovative methods to
engage and prepare students for success. Flexibility to innovate is a hallmark of the BUILD initiative.
Applicants are encouraged to think creatively about how to address identified needs at their institutions and
develop visionary approaches that encompass institutional, social, and individual factors.
The National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) Initiative:
Lack of adequate mentoring is consistently described as a problem for trainees from all backgrounds. The
NRMN initiative will develop a highly networked set of motivated and skilled mentors from various disciplines
linked to mentees across the country – both from BUILD institutions and elsewhere – for individuals from the
undergraduate to early career faculty level. In addition to linking individuals to mentors, the NRMN will
develop best practices for mentoring, providing training opportunities for mentors, and providing networking
and professional opportunities for mentees. The NRMN is expected to contribute substantially to attainment
of hallmarks of successful research career progression for each career stage.
The Coordination and Evaluation Center (CEC):
The CEC will coordinate consortium-wide activities and evaluate BUILD and NRMN programs. The CEC will
facilitate the development of consortium-wide hallmarks, including core competencies, of successful
biomedical research career progression and examination of the impact of BUILD and NRMN programs
according to these hallmarks. These consortium-wide development activities will be established through
consensus in Executive Steering Committee meetings, which will be facilitated by the CEC (See Section VI
for details about the Executive Steering Committee). The CEC will coordinate the collection and reporting of
data from BUILD and NRMN awardees. The CEC will also facilitate consortium-wide discussions of
approaches, progress, and lessons learned, and will serve as the focal point for dissemination of information
to the broader research training and mentoring communities.
The overarching goal of the Diversity Program Consortium is to enhance the diversity of well-trained biomedical
research scientists who can successfully compete for NIH research funding and/or otherwise contribute to the
NIH-funded workforce. The BUILD and NRMN initiatives are not intended to support replication or expansion of
existing programs at applicant institutions (for example, simply increasing the number of participants in current
NIH-funded research training or mentoring programs would not be responsive to this funding announcement).
Promising practices and principles derived from the literature or from pilot programs may be leveraged to inform
applicants' approaches and/or expansion of existing efforts in novel ways. These initiatives are intended to allow
institutions to develop and pilot novel approaches to biomedical research training and mentoring and disseminate
successful approaches.
This FOA addresses the CEC, which will serve a critical organizing function for the consortium as a whole,
facilitate the development of consortium-wide goals, design instruments and measures of success toward the
individual and consortium-wide goals, and serve as a focal point for communication and dissemination.

Purpose/Objectives
The CEC will coordinate the activities of the consortium to ensure that all BUILD and NRMN awardees address
the consortium identified goals and objectives. The activities to be undertaken through the BUILD and NRMN
awards will allow transformative approaches to participant engagement and training to be piloted. The CEC will

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

5 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

conduct evaluation activities to ensure that each approach is assessed with respect to agreed-upon principles,
that different approaches may be compared, and that lessons learned are disseminated. For the purpose of this
FOA, "participants" include undergraduates, graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, and early career faculty
who are intended to benefit from BUILD and/or NRMN activities.
The CEC will work collaboratively with BUILD and NRMN awardees to 1) identify fundamental attributes of
successful biomedical researchers, i.e., hallmarks of success, including core competencies, for each career
stage; 2) identify metrics for site-specific goals; 3) assess the impact of approaches used by each site on the
attainment of hallmarks of success by participants; 4) coordinate data acquisition across sites; and 5)
disseminate consortium-endorsed practices and lessons learned to transform training and mentoring programs
across the nation. The CEC will also provide administrative support for the Executive Steering Committee and its
subcommittees, and coordinate the annual grantees meeting and other consortium-wide activities as required.
(See Section VI for details about the Executive Steering Committee.)
To develop hallmarks of success at each career stage, the CEC will facilitate a discussion within the consortium
after awards are made. While awardees will maintain goals tailored for their particular environments, each will
also work toward consortium-wide goals and hallmarks of success.
The CEC will work collaboratively with BUILD and NRMN awardees to design meaningful ways to assess the
impact of approaches tailored toward the individual environments as well as those intended to address
consortium-wide goals. The consortium as a whole will strive to enhance the way in which program participants
are engaged and trained, awardees learn from each other during the course of the program, and approaches are
modified based on lessons learned to improve overall impact.
The leadership and key personnel of the CEC are expected to have broad experience working collaboratively to
assess and evaluate biomedical research training and mentoring activities, including those involving diverse
student groups. The ability to work collaboratively with multiple communities while providing strong leadership in
evaluative activities is a requirement. The CEC must also include individuals with expertise in multi-site
evaluation as well as in coordination, communication, and consensus-building among diverse groups of
stakeholders. The CEC should also include individuals with knowledge and expertise regarding factors that
contribute to decisions to pursue, or not to pursue, biomedical research careers and the current evidence base
related to training and mentoring practices and approaches to evaluate them.
The CEC will conduct the following activities:
Establishing standardized evaluation approaches and data collection protocols for the BUILD and NRMN
programs that include individual and institutional demographic characteristics, nature of participation in
the BUILD and NRMN programs, and achievement of training and career milestones.
Identifying and/or developing instruments designed to assess participants' perceptions and attitudes
towards biomedical research and biomedical research careers and to assess their attainment of hallmarks
of success.
Collaborating with BUILD and NRMN awardees to iteratively assess the impact of new approaches on
participants' perception and attitudes towards biomedical research careers and the impact of the
approaches on attainment of hallmarks of success, providing feedback so that approaches may be
adjusted to maximize impact.
Working with NIH staff to obtain all necessary federal clearances for data collection from BUILD and
NRMN participants.
Ensuring that evaluation metrics for BUILD and NRMN are compatible with those of trans-NIH training
and scientific research workforce diversity program evaluation efforts.
Coordinating ongoing data collection, data management, and reporting activities across BUILD and
NRMN institutions.
Conducting an outcome evaluation of BUILD and NRMN according to consortium-specified metrics,
including an evaluation of interim milestones when applicable.
Developing novel and innovative quantitative or qualitative approaches to identify the unique impact of
BUILD and NRMN programs on participant outcomes, through the use of appropriate comparison groups,
statistical techniques, or other evaluation strategies.
Developing novel and innovative quantitative or qualitative approaches to assess potential higher-level
impacts of BUILD and NRMN, such as changes to NIH-funded research workforce composition,

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

6 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

engagement, or productivity; or changes to institutional/organizational operating procedures, resource
allocation, or policies.
Conducting a process evaluation of the BUILD sites and NRMN to assess implementation and ongoing
operations and their impact on program outcomes.
Planning and enabling effective communications across the multiple BUILD and NRMN institutions to
facilitate CEC objectives of data solicitations and coordination.
Coordinating annual meetings with the BUILD and NRMN awardees to facilitate communication about
program progress, preliminary evaluation findings, and the sharing of successes and challenges with all
participants.
Organizing and coordinating Executive Steering Committee Meetings. Assisting the Executive Steering
Committee in organizing appropriate subcommittees.
Facilitating efficient communications between the NIH Program Officials, members of the CEC Steering
Committee, and the Executive Steering Committee to allow for consultations, oversight of the project, and
setting strategic directions.
Developing and maintaining a consortium website and portal for sharing information and lessons learned.
Disseminating evaluation results to relevant stakeholders, including professional societies, research
organizations, medical and basic science associations, academic institutions, federal agencies, and other
organizations.
Note: The coordination among the CEC, BUILD, and NRMN awardees for data collection and evaluation will be
established after the awardees for these programs are selected. It is therefore not necessary for CEC applicants
to collaborate with specific BUILD or NRMN applicants or planning grant awardees as part of their application.
The CEC is expected to develop evaluation metrics and methods to assess the attainment of hallmarks of career
success, including core competencies, by BUILD and NRMN participants at multiple career stages. This effort
will include identifying Consortium-wide evaluation questions, and short-, intermediate-, and long-term metrics
deemed appropriate for conducting assessments during various timeframes of the award period. While the
metrics will be specified collectively by the group after awards are issued, the NIH will also expect the CEC to
gather core data.
At a minimum, it is expected that the CEC will establish procedures for data collection and begin to gather the
following core data:
Completion of undergraduate or graduate degree, completion of postdoctoral research training, and
entrance into graduate programs, postdoctoral research training of faculty position in a biomedical field.
Involvement in biomedical research appropriate to career stage (e.g., ranging from research
assistantships for undergraduates to early career faculty participating as investigators, etc.)
Authorship on publications in peer review journals.
Receipt of NIH or other peer reviewed grants or fellowships.
Examples of additional information collected for evaluation purposes may include, but is not limited to:
Attainment of hallmarks of success, or core competencies, as defined by the consortium.
Significant enhancement of awareness about biomedical research careers, improved understanding of
the requirements and strategies for success in those careers, and measurable enhancement of interest in
research.
Establishment of quality mentor training programs (applicable to in-person and online mentoring
strategies) with measurable mentoring outcomes.
Improved mentoring skills demonstrated by mentors as ascertained by metrics to be determined through
the NRMN and CEC collaboration.
Changes in the biomedical research workforce composition, engagement, or productivity; or changes to
institutional/organizational operating procedures or policies.
Potential sustainability of initiative activities.
In conducting the overall program evaluation, it is expected that the CEC may also refine previously identified
evaluation questions and metrics as appropriate to assess program outcomes. The questions and data are
expected to apply to outcomes at the individual, institutional, and national level as appropriate, particularly
related to enhancing diversity in the biomedical research workforce and establishing overall sustainability of

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

7 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

successful strategies. The Diversity Program Consortium, through its collaborative and inclusive governance
structure will establish and define any additional data elements required to effectively evaluate the BUILD and
NRMN, including data intended to measure hallmarks of success at each career stage. It is anticipated that data
may be obtained from various sources (e.g., NIH xTrain/eRA Commons, BUILD and NRMN grantees, federal and
private entities when appropriate). The Consortium and/or the CEC will disseminate data collection requirements
and obtain OMB clearance and other approvals of recommended data as needed.

Technical Assistance Webinars
Potential applicants are strongly encouraged to participate in one or more pre-application Technical Assistance
webinars, which will provide an opportunity to clarify expectations for the FOA so applicant organizations can
present their strongest case for support. The webinar is scheduled for January 2014. Additional information will
be posted on the Common Fund website at http://commonfund.nih.gov/diversity/.

Section II. Award Information
Funding Instrument

Cooperative Agreement: A support mechanism used when there will be
substantial Federal scientific or programmatic involvement. Substantial
involvement means that, after award, NIH staff will assist, guide, coordinate,
or participate in project activities.

Application Types
Allowed

New
The OER Glossary and the PHS 398 Application Guide provide details on
these application types.

Funds Available
and Anticipated
Number of Awards

The NIH Common Fund intends to commit $1.75 Million in FY 2014. A single
award is anticipated contingent upon the availability of funds.

Award Budget

Application budgets may not exceed $1.75 Million in total costs annually.

Award Project
Period

The project period is 5 years.

NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Poli cy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and
awards made in response to this FOA.

Section III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants
Eligible Organizations
Higher Education Institutions
Public/State Controlled Institutions of Higher Education
Private Institutions of Higher Education
The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as
Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:
Hispanic-serving Institutions
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs)
Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions
Asian American Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISIs)

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

8 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
Nonprofits with 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)
Nonprofits without 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)
For-Profit Organizations
Small Businesses
For-Profit Organizations (Other than Small Businesses)
Governments
State Governments
County Governments
City or Township Governments
Special District Governments
Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Federally Recognized)
Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Other than Federally Recognized)
U.S. Territory or Possession
Other
Independent School Districts
Public Housing Authorities/Indian Housing Authorities
Native American Tribal Organizations (other than Federally recognized tribal governments)
Faith-based or Community-based Organizations
Regional Organizations

Foreign Institutions
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are not eligible to apply.
Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.
Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Poli cy Statement, are not allowed.

Required Registrations
Applicant Organizations
Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the PHS 398
Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the
application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration
process as soon as possible. The NIH Policy on Late Submission of Grant Applications states that failure to
complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission.
Dun and Bradstreet Universal Numbering System (DUNS) - All registrations require that applicants be
issued a DUNS number. After obtaining a DUNS number, applicants can begin both SAM and eRA
Commons registrations. The same DUNS number must be used for all registrations, as well as on the
grant application.
System for Award Management (SAM) (formerly CCR) – 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.
eRA Commons - Applicants must have an active DUNS number and SAM registration in order to complete
the eRA Commons registration. Organizations can register with the eRA Commons as they are working
through their SAM or Grants.gov registration. 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.

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

9 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))
All PD(s)/PI(s) must have an eRA Commons account and should work with their organizational officials to either
create a new account or to affiliate an existing account with the applicant organization’s eRA Commons account.
If the PD/PI is also the organizational Signing Official, they must have two distinct eRA Commons accounts, one
for each role. Obtaining an eRA Commons account can take up to 2 weeks.

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 his/her organization to develop
an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with
disabilities are always encouraged to apply for NIH support.
For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PD(s)/PI(s), visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal
Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the PHS
398 Application Guide.

2. Cost Sharing
This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Poli cy Statement.

3. Additional Information on Eligibility
Number of Applications
Only one application per institution, identified by a unique DUNS number, is allowed.
NIH will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one already reviewed within the past
thirty-seven months (as described in the NIH Grants Poli cy Statement), except for submission:
To an RFA of an application that was submitted previously as an investigator-initiated application but not
paid;
Of an investigator-initiated application that was originally submitted to an RFA but not paid; or
Of an application with a changed grant activity code.
Note: Applicants for BUILD or NRMN awards are eligible to apply to this FOA. However, the CEC awardee may
not receive a BUILD or NRMN award or be involved as a collaborating institution on a BUILD or NRMN award.

Section IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Address to Request Application Package
Applicants are required to prepare applications according to the current PHS 398 application forms in
accordance with the PHS 398 Application Guide.

2. Content and Form of Application Submission
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide, except where instructed in
this funding opportunity announcement to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the Application
Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be
delayed or not accepted for review.

Letter of Intent
Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not enter into the review of a subsequent
application, the information that it contains allows IC staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the
review.

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

10 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

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:
Pamela L. Thornton, PhD, MSW
Common Fund Diversity Initiatives
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD)
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 800
Bethesda, MD 20892-5465
Telephone: 301-402-1366
Email: [email protected]

Application Submission
Applications must be prepared using the PHS 398 research grant application forms and instructions for preparing
a research grant application. Submit a signed, typewritten original of the application, including the checklist, five
signed photocopies and all copies of the Appendix files in one package to:
Center for Scientific Review
National Institutes of Health
6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 1040, MSC 7710
Bethesda, MD 20892-7710 (U.S. Postal Service Express or regular mail)
Bethesda, MD 20817 (for express/courier service; non-USPS service)

Page Limitations
All page limitations described in the PHS 398 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed,
in addition to the following page limitations to the Research Strategy section of each component of the
application.
Overall: 12 pages
Administrative Core: 12 pages
Data Coordination Core: 12 pages
Evaluation Core: 12 pages

Instructions for the Submission of Multi-Component Applications
The following section supplements the instructions found in the PHS 398 Application Guide, and should be used
for preparing a multi-component application.
The application should consist of the following components:
Overall: required
Administrative Core: required, 1 maximum
Data Coordination Core: required, 1 maximum
Evaluation Core: required, 1 maximum

Overall Component
All instructions in the PHS398 Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as
noted.

Face Page (Overall)

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

11 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Description, Project/Performance Sites, Senior/Key Personnel,
Other Significant Contributors, Human Embryonic Stem Cells
(Overall)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Table of Contents (Overall)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Detailed Budget for Initial Budget Period (Overall)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Budget for Entire Proposed Period of Support (Overall)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Biographical Sketch (Overall)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Resources (Overall)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Research Plan (Overall)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Specific Aims: Describe the specific aims for the overall CEC.
Research Strategy: Describe the overall model for the CEC and a vision for general approaches to assess
efficacy of diverse training and mentoring approaches. Identify collaborating institutions and organizations if
any, and their role in the CEC. Summarize the strengths of the applicant organization and collaborators,
including expertise and knowledge in understanding factors that contribute to decisions to pursue, or not to
pursue, biomedical research careers; assessing and evaluating biomedical research training and mentoring
activities; working collaboratively and building consensus with diverse stakeholder groups; and coordinating
multi-site evaluation activities. Describe a vision for communicating the outcome of the Diversity Program
Consortium with the wider community. Describe the integration of all the center cores and provide a project
timeline that incorporates activities from each core.
Protection of Human Subjects: Because CEC activities will involve the dissemination of evaluation
findings derived from data with personal identifiers from BUILD and NRMN participants, it is expected that
the CEC will involve human subjects research. The application should clearly specify the activities that do
not involve human subjects research or involve exempt or non-exempt human subjects research and provide
a justification for this determination. Appropriate human subjects information should be completed in
accordance with PHS 398 instructions for all activities involving exempt or non-exempt human subjects
research.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing
Plans (Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model Organisms, and Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS)) as
provided in the PHS 398 Application Guide.

Administrative Core
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

12 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

noted.

Face Page (Administrative Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Description, Project/Performance Sites, Senior/Key Personnel,
Other Significant Contributors, Human Embryonic Stem Cells
(Administrative Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Table of Contents (Administrative Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Detailed Budget for Initial Budget Period (Administrative Core )
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed. In addition, funds for the PD(s)/PI(s) to
organize and travel to the annual grantees meeting and Executive Steering Committee meetings, held in or near
Bethesda, MD, as well as funds for the PD(s)/PI(s) to travel to individual consortium sites should be included in
the budget request. The first annual grantees meeting/Executive Steering Committee meeting will take place in
October, 2014.

Budget for Entire Proposed Period of Support (Administrative Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Biographical Sketch (Administrative Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Resources (Administrative Core )
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Research Plan (Administrative Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Specific Aims: This section should include specific aims of the Administrative Core and how they relate to
the overall CEC aims.
Research Strategy: Describe the plans for bringing all consortium components together to develop
consortium agreements pertaining to hallmarks of success and appropriate measures of success at each
career stage. Describe plans to communicate within the consortium and the frequency with which
coordinating calls and/or meetings are expected to be required. Describe plans for a consortium website
and/or other communications tools to convey information to the consortium members and community at
large. Describe CEC’s organizational and governance structure and explain the roles and responsibilities of
Administrative Core personnel. Describe the processes to be used to allocate and prioritize fiscal and other
resources. Describe available infrastructure to support the required administrative activities of the CEC.
Include a management plan that describes the composition and roles of any committees or boards proposed
to help manage or oversee CEC activities, including the required CEC Steering Committee.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing
Plans (Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model Organisms, and Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS)) as
provided in the PHS 398 Application Guide.

Data Coordination Core

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

13 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as
noted.

Face Page (Data Coordination Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Description, Project/Performance Sites, Senior/Key Personnel,
Other Significant Contributors, Human Embryonic Stem Cells (Data
Coordination Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Table of Contents (Data Coordination Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Detailed Budget for Initial Budget Period (Data Coordination Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Budget for Entire Proposed Period of Support (Data Coordination
Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Biographical Sketch (Data Coordination Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Resources (Data Coordination Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Research Plan (Data Coordination Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Specific Aims: This section should include specific aims of the Data Coordination Core and how they
relate to the overall CEC aims.
Research Strategy: Describe the framework or conceptual model for the coordination of data collection
activities across BUILD sites and the NRMN. Describe proposed strategies and processes to promote
standardization or harmonization of data collection across BUILD sites and the NRMN. Describe the
approach and infrastructure available to successfully collect, store, and manage data across the BUILD and
NRMN programs. Describe monitoring or oversight strategies to maximize data quality and minimize missing
data. Describe how implementation or operational difficulties regarding data collection by individual sites will
be addressed. Describe strategies and procedures to ensure privacy and security of coded data obtained
from BUILD and NRMN sites. Identify personnel who will be involved in data coordination activities and their
relevant expertise. Identify planned committees or workgroups to guide, support, or implement data
coordination activities.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing
Plans (Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model Organisms, and Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS)) as
provided in the PHS 398 Application Guide.

Evaluation Core
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions, as

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

14 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

noted.

Face Page (Evaluation Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Description, Project/Performance Sites, Senior/Key Personnel,
Other Significant Contributors, Human Embryonic Stem Cells
(Evaluation Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Table of Contents (Evaluation Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Detailed Budget for Initial Budget Period (Evaluation Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Budget for Entire Proposed Period of Support (Evaluation Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Biographical Sketch (Evaluation Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Resources (Evaluation Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.

Research Plan (Evaluation Core)
All instructions in the PHS 398 Application Guide must be followed.
Specific Aims: This section should include specific aims of the Evaluation Core and how they relate to the
overall CEC aims.
Research Strategy: Describe the theoretical model(s) or conceptual framework(s) that will guide evaluation
activities. Describe factors that contribute to decisions to pursue, or not to pursue, biomedical research
careers and how approaches that seek to enhance student engagement, interest, and achievement may be
evaluated. Describe likely comparison groups and methods to compare efficacy. Describe attributes of
successful biomedical researchers that might be identified by the consortium as hallmarks of success at
each career stage. Describe approaches that will be used to determine whether individual approaches used
by BUILD and NRMN are enhancing the ability of trainees and participants to achieve these career
hallmarks. Describe approaches to analyze data across consortium components to yield fundamental
insights about factors that determine whether individuals select biomedical research careers, whether their
interest is sustained, and whether they ultimately excel in these careers. Describe additional evaluation
strategies to identify the unique impact of the BUILD and NRMN programs on participant outcomes as well
as higher-level impacts on institutions, organizations, and the biomedical research workforce. Describe likely
comparison groups that will be required for these analyses. Describe proposed components of the process
evaluation to assess program implementation and ongoing operations of the BUILD sites and the NRMN.
Identify personnel who will be involved in evaluation activities and their relevant expertise. Identify planned
committees or workgroups to guide, support, or implement evaluation activities.
Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing
Plans (Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model Organisms, and Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS)) as

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

15 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

provided in the PHS 398 Application Guide.

Appendix for the Entire Application
Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow all instructions for the Appendix (please note all format
requirements) as described in the PHS 398 Application Guide.

3. Submission Dates and Times
Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates.
Information on the process of receipt and determining if your application is considered “on-time” is described in
detail in the PHS 398 Application Guide.
Applicants may track the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH’s electronic system for grants
administration.

4. Intergovernmental Review (E.O. 12372)
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.

5. Funding Restrictions
All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the
NIH Grants Pol i cy Statement.
Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the NIH Grants Poli cy Statement.

6. Other Submission Requirements and Information
Applications must be received on or before the due dates in Part I. Overview Information. If an application is
received after that date, it will not be reviewed.
Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness by the Center for Scientific Review and
responsiveness by components of participating organizations, NIH. Applications that are incomplete and/or
nonresponsive will not be reviewed.

Post Submission Materials
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in NOT-OD-13-030.

Section V. Application Review Information
1. Criteria
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. As part of the NIH mission, all
applications submitted to the NIH in support of biomedical and behavioral research are evaluated for scientific
and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.

Overall Impact - Overall
Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the center 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 center proposed).

Scored Review Criteria - Overall
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

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

16 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

major scientific impact. For example, a center that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a
field.

Significance
Does the center address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? If the aims of the
center 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, specific for this FOA: Are the overall plans for coordination and evaluation to be conducted by
the CEC likely to foster a collaborative environment across the consortium? Are the research infrastructure,
available resources, and institutional collaborations in place and adequate to support the overall mission of
the CEC?

Investigator(s)
Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the center? If Early Stage
Investigators or New Investigators, or in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate
experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that
have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have
complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational
structure appropriate for the project?
In addition, specific for this FOA: Has the PD/PI demonstrated the ability to coordinate complex consortia to
establish and implement joint goals? Is the PD/PI experienced with programs that focus on diverse
participant populations? Has the PD/PI demonstrated sufficient leadership in coordinating data collection
and evaluation activities across multiple sites? Do the investigators have the necessary experience and
scientific/technical expertise to manage and analyze types of data that will be collected from the BUILD and
NRMN programs? Do the investigators have expert facilitation skills to support solution and consensus
building in collaborative environments? Do the investigators have experience disseminating evaluation
findings to diverse stakeholders?

Innovation
Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing
novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the
concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or
novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts,
approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?
In addition, specific for this FOA: Does the application include innovative quantitative or qualitative
approaches, methodologies, or study designs to evaluate the effectiveness or impact of the BUILD and
NRMN programs?

Approach
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the
specific aims of the center? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success
presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will
particularly risky aspects be managed?
If the center involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, are there 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 children, justified in terms of the
scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
Are potential proposed evaluation methods robust and is the vision for comparing across BUILD and NRMN

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

17 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

sites compelling? Are activities of the project cores well integrated? Is an achievable project timeline
provided?

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, specific for this FOA: Is the environment of the awardee institution adequate to support the CEC
in accomplishing its goal of managing and evaluating the diverse BUILD and NMRN activities?

Additional Review Criteria - Overall
As applicable for the center 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.

Administrative Core
Does the vision for coordination across BUILD and NRMN sites promote a collaborative environment?
Will the coordination efforts be likely to unite the various sites and foster collective goals?
Is a clear and logical organizational and governance structure described?
Are the roles and responsibilities of Administrative Core personnel appropriate and clearly delineated?
Are the processes to be used to allocate and prioritize fiscal and other resources as appropriate?
Are the plans to develop a consortium website and/or other communications tools to convey information
to consortium and community members appropriate?
Is a plan provided to ensure timely and effective communication across project cores and with BUILD
sites and the NRMN?
Is a management plan included that describes the composition and roles of any committees or boards,
including the required CEC Steering Committee, proposed to help manage and oversee the CEC?
Is the infrastructure to support communication, data coordination and evaluation activities described?
Are key administrative personnel experienced in the organization of meetings, workshops, and other
networking activities, and are the personnel appropriate for record keeping, website development, and
other communications tasks?

Data Coordination Core
Is a clear and logical framework or conceptual model for the coordination of data collection across BUILD
sites and the NRMN provided?
Are proposed strategies and processes to promote standardization and harmonization of operating
procedures across BUILD sites and NRMN appropriate? Are they likely to be successful?
Is the described infrastructure to support data collection, storage, and management appropriate and
comprehensive?
Are data monitoring issues or oversight strategies to ensure data quality and address missing data
adequately addressed?
Are strategies to deal with implementation obstacles or operational difficulties regarding data collection by
individual program sites adequately addressed?
Are strategies and procedures to ensure data privacy and security of coded data appropriate?
Are the roles of core personnel involved in data coordination activities well described? Is the expertise of
core personnel appropriate?
Are planned committees or workgroups involved in data coordination activities appropriate?

Evaluation Core
Is the theoretical model or conceptual framework guiding evaluation activities appropriate?
Is the description of the attributes of successful biomedical researchers at each career stage

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

18 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

well-reasoned?
Are the methods to be used to assess efficacy of individual BUILD and NRMN activities compelling and
flexible enough to adapt as the specific plans of BUILD and NRMN awardees become known?
Are comparison groups described, and are they appropriate for the assessment of approaches to be
implemented by BUILD and NRMN?
Is the process evaluation well-described and flexible enough to accommodate various processes to be
employed by BUILD and NRMN sites?
Are appropriate data analytic strategies proposed to understand factors associated with entry and
success in biomedical research careers?
Are additional evaluation activities described to identify the unique impact of BUILD and NRMN programs
on participant outcomes and higher-level systems change?
Are the roles of core personnel clearly described? Is their expertise appropriate?
Are planned committees or workgroups involved in data coordination activities appropriate?

Protections for Human Subjects
For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the six categories of research that
are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human
subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the
following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits
to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring
for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the six categories of
research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the
exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional
information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of
Human Subjects.

Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children
When the proposed center 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 children to determine if it is justified in terms of the
scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For additional information on review of the Inclusion
section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.

Vertebrate Animals
The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment
according to the following five points: 1) proposed use of the animals, and species, strains, ages, sex, and
numbers to be used; 2) justifications for the use of animals and for the appropriateness of the species and
numbers proposed; 3) adequacy of veterinary care; 4) procedures for limiting discomfort, distress, pain and
injury to that which is unavoidable in the conduct of scientifically sound research including the use of
analgesic, anesthetic, and tranquilizing drugs and/or comfortable restraining devices; and 5) methods of
euthanasia and reason for selection if not consistent with the AVMA Guidelines on Euthanasia. For
additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review
of the Vertebrate Animal Section.

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

Resubmissions
Not Applicable

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

19 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

Renewals
Not Applicable

Revisions
Not Applicable

Additional Review Considerations - Overall
As applicable for the center proposed, reviewers will consider each of the following items, but will not give scores
for these items, and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.

Applications from Foreign Organizations
Not Applicable

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

Resource Sharing Plans
Reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing
the following types of resources, are reasonable: 1) Data Sharing Plan; 2) Sharing Model Organisms; and 3)
Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS).

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

2. Review and Selection Process
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s),
convened by the CSR, 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:
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.
Will receive a written critique.
Appeals of initial peer review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this FOA.
Applications will be assigned to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center and will compete for available funds with
all other recommended applications submitted in response to this FOA. Following initial peer review,
recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the NIMHD 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
1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

20 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary
Statement (written critique) via the eRA Commons.
Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Poli cy Statement.

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 Pol i cy Statement.
A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization for
successful applications. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will
be sent via email to the grantee’s business official.
Awardees must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.5. Funding Restrictions. Selection of
an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the
NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable
pre-award costs.
Any application awarded in response to this FOA will be subject to the DUNS, SAM Registration, and
Transparency Act requirements as noted on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website.

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Poli cy Statement as part of the NoA.
For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Pol i cy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant
Awards, Subpart A: General and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and
Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities. More information is provided at Award
Conditions and Information for NIH Grants.

Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award
The following special terms of award are in addition to, and not in lieu of, otherwise applicable U.S. Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) administrative guidelines, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
(DHHS) grant administration regulations at 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92 (Part 92 is applicable when State and local
Governments are eligible to apply), and other HHS, PHS, and NIH grant administration policies.
The administrative and funding instrument used for this program will be the cooperative agreement, an
"assistance" mechanism (rather than an "acquisition" mechanism), in which substantial NIH programmatic
involvement with the awardees is anticipated during the performance of the activities. Under the cooperative
agreement, the NIH purpose is to support and stimulate the recipients' activities by involvement in and otherwise
working jointly with the award recipients in a partnership role; it is not to assume direction, prime responsibility,
or a dominant role in the activities. Consistent with this concept, the dominant role and prime responsibility
resides with the awardees for the project as a whole, although specific tasks and activities may be shared among
the awardees and the NIH as defined below.
The PD(s)/PI(s) will have the primary responsibility for:
All aspects of the study, including any modification of project design, conduct of the project, quality
control, data analysis and interpretation, preparation of publications, and collaboration with other
investigators will be verified, confirmed and established when necessary by the Steering Committee.
Awardee will agree to the governance of the Steering Committee and, for issues affecting the consortium
as a whole, of the Executive Steering Committee.
Awardee will agree to accept close coordination, cooperation, and participation of the Enhancing the
Diversity of the NIH-Funded Workforce Working Group in those aspects of scientific and technical

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

21 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

management of the project as described under "NIH Program Staff Responsibilities."
Awardee will provide goals and progress toward those goals at regular intervals as requested by the
Steering Committee and the Executive Steering Committee.
Awardee will ensure that resources (e.g. data sets; procedure manuals) developed as part of this project
are made publicly available and that results are published in a timely manner.
Awardee will adhere to the Executive Steering Committee policies regarding intellectual property, data
release and other policies that might be established during the course of this activity that are consistent
with applicable NIH policies, laws, and regulations.
Awardee will retain custody of and have primary rights to the data and software developed under these
awards, subject to Government rights of access consistent with current DHHS, PHS, and NIH policies.
The CEC and consortium will develop plans for data sharing among awardees. All evaluation-related data
will be shared with the NIH at the conclusion of the award.
NIH staff have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship
role in awards, as described below:
The Project Scientists for the project will serve on the Steering Committee and the Executive Steering
Committee. The Project Scientists may work with the awardees on any issues that come before these
Committees.
The Project Scientists will serve as a liaison between the awardee and the Enhancing the Diversity of the
NIH-Funded Workforce Working Group. The Coordinators of the Enhancing the Diversity of the
NIH-Funded Workforce Working Group will periodically report progress to the Director of the Division of
Program Coordination, Planning, and Strategic Initiatives (DPCPSI), and the Chairs of the Working
Group.
The NIH reserves the right to withhold funding or curtail the study (of an individual award) in the event of
(a) substantive changes in the agreed-upon work scope with which NIH cannot concur, (b) human subject
ethical issues that may dictate a premature termination; (c) or project not progressing well.
Support or other involvement of industry or any other third party in the study (e.g., participation by the
third party; involvement of project resources or citing the name of the study or NIH support; or special
access to project results, data, findings or resources) may be advantageous and appropriate. However,
except for licensing of patents or copyrights, support or involvement of any third party will occur only
following notification of and concurrence by NIH.
Additionally, an NIH Program Official will be responsible for the normal scientific and programmatic
stewardship of the award and will be named in the award notice.
Areas of joint responsibility include:
A Steering Committee will serve as the primary governing board for the cooperative agreement funded under this
FOA. The Steering Committee membership will include the NIH Program Official, NIH Project Scientist(s), the
PD(s)/PI(s) of the awarded cooperative agreement, who will serve as Steering Committee Chair(s), and two
external members not involved in the project who are selected by the PD(s)/PI(s). Additional members of the
Enhancing the Diversity of the NIH-Funded Workforce Working Group may be appointed to the Steering
Committee by the co-chairs of the Working Group, but the total number of NIH votes may not exceed 1/3 of the
Steering Committee voting membership. Other government staff may attend the Steering Committee meetings, if
their expertise is required for specific discussions.
The Steering Committee will:
Meet at least annually or as needed, with intermittent conference calls as needed.
Develop recommendations for uniform procedures and policies necessary to meet the goals of the FOA
and the goals of the Enhancing the Diversity of the NIH-Funded Workforce Program as a whole.
Provide input to the PD/PI with respect to the activities of the CEC and its ability to coordinate and
evaluate the activities of BUILD and NRMN sites, and progress in meeting the goals of the FOA.
Schedule the time for, and prepare concise (3 to 4 pages) summaries of, the Steering Committee
meetings, which will be delivered to members of the group within 30 days after each meeting.
Provide representation on the Executive Steering Committee (see below) to address issues relevant to
the Diversity Program Consortium as a whole.

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

22 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

Dispute Resolution:
Any disagreements that may arise in scientific or programmatic matters (within the scope of the award) between
award recipients and the NIH may be brought to Dispute Resolution. A Dispute Resolution Panel composed of
three members will be convened. The three members will be a designee of the Steering Committee chosen
without NIH staff voting, one NIH designee, and a third designee with expertise in the relevant area who is
chosen by the other two. In the case of individual disagreement, the first member may be chosen by the
individual awardee. This special dispute resolution procedure does not alter the awardee's right to appeal an
adverse action that is otherwise appealable in accordance with PHS regulation 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D and
DHHS regulation 45 CFR Part 16.
Executive Steering Committee:
An Executive Steering Committee (ESC) will be responsible for providing general oversight and guidance to the
Diversity Program Consortium. The ESC membership will include one non-NIH member from the Steering
Committee of each of the BUILD, NRMN, and CEC awards, the NIH Program Official and/or Project Scientists for
each program, and a member of the Enhancing the Diversity of the NIH-Funded Workforce Working Group, who
will serve as ESC Chair. The co-chairs of the Enhancing the Diversity of the NIH-Funded Workforce Working
Group may appoint additional members from the Working Group to serve as members on the ESC, but the total
number of NIH votes may not exceed 1/3 of the Executive Committee voting membership. Awardee members of
the ESC will be required to accept and implement policies approved by the ESC. The CEC will be responsible for
communicating ESC feedback and guidance to the BUILD, NRMN, and CEC Steering Committees.
The ESC will meet at least once annually, with intermittent conference calls as needed. The first ESC meeting
will take place during the Annual Grantees Meeting in October, 2014.
Responsibilities of the ESC include the following:
Form sub-committees as necessary to work through detailed issues that affect the Diversity Program
Consortium as a whole.
Define competencies to be targeted through BUILD and NRMN activities.
Define hallmarks of success in biomedical research careers at various career stages.
Develop policies for adoption of mentoring standards.
Develop procedures and policies for sharing information between projects and with the wider community.
Review and consider issues and progress of individual awardees so that lessons learned can be shared,
and plans of the Diversity Program Consortium as a whole and of individual projects may be modified to
have maximal impact.
Contribute content and ideas for a program website managed by the CEC for the purposes of sharing
information.
Develop a public summary of lessons learned across the Program as a whole and applicability of the
lessons to the wider community.

3. Reporting
When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the Non-Competing Continuation Grant
Progress Report (PHS 2590 or RPPR) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Pol i cy
Statement.
A final progress report, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are
required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Poli cy Statement.
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Transparency Act), includes a requirement
for awardees of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation
under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later. All awardees of applicable NIH grants and
cooperative agreements are required to report to the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at
www.fsrs.gov on all subawards over $25,000. See the NIH Grants Poli cy Statement for additional information on
this reporting requirement.

4. Evaluation

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

23 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

In carrying out its stewardship of research workforce diversity initiatives, the NIH will periodically evaluate the
CEC, BUILD and NRMN programs. In assessing the effectiveness of its workforce diversity investments, NIH
may request information from the CEC and other databases, PD(s)/PI(s), and from BUILD or NRMN participants
themselves. Where necessary, PD(s)/PI(s) and participants may be contacted after the completion of a BUILD or
NRMN program for periodic updates on participants' subsequent educational or employment history and
professional activities. Evaluation of the BUILD, NRMN and CEC will be carried out continuously over the first
five years of the program. The findings of this evaluation will determine whether the initiative will be continued for
an additional five years as configured, continued with modifications, or discontinued.
The Diversity Program Consortium, through its collaborative and inclusive governance structure will establish
and define any additional data elements required to effectively evaluate the BUILD and NRMN, including data
intended to measure hallmarks of success, including core competencies, at each career stage. The Consortium
and/or the CEC will disseminate these requirements and obtain OMB clearance of recommended date as
needed.
The NIH will conduct an evaluation of the CEC continuously over the first five years of the program.
The list below includes, but is not limited to, key metrics the NIH may use to help determine whether
the CEC goals or outcomes have been met.
Effectiveness of organization and oversight of consortia-wide meetings.
Provision of expert assistance in supporting the development of consortium-wide evaluation protocols and
common evaluation measures.
Demonstration of expertise in developing and maintaining data management systems for the collection of
evaluation data.
Effective promotion of collaborations across program sites to support common constructs and instruments
and standard procedures.
Utilization of strategies to facilitate effective communication consortium-wide.
Development of high impact ways to disseminate new consortia-wide research findings to key
stakeholders.

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 Commons Help Desk (Questions regarding eRA Commons registration, submitting and tracking an
application, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, post submission issues)
Telephone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
Web ticketing system: https://public.era.nih.gov/commonshelp
TTY: 301-451-5939
Email: [email protected]
GrantsInfo (Questions regarding application instructions and process, finding NIH grant resources)
Telephone: 301-435-0714
TTY: 301-451-5936
Email: [email protected]

Scientific/Research Contact(s)
Pamela L. Thornton, PhD, MSW
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD)
Telephone: 301-594-8696
Email: [email protected]

Peer Review Contact(s)

1/23/2014 11:52 AM

RFA-RM-13-015: NIH Coordination and Evaluation Center for Enhancing...

24 of 24

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-13-015.html

Karyl Swartz, PhD
Center for Scientific Review (CSR)
Telephone: 301-435-1883
Email: [email protected]

Financial/Grants Management Contact(s)
Priscilla Grant, JD
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD)
Telephone: 301-594-8412
Email: [email protected]

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 Poli cy Statement.

Authority and Regulations
Awards are made under the authority of sections 301, 402, and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended
(42 USC 241, 282, and 284) and the Code of Federal Regulations, 42 CFR Parts 52 and 66, and 45 CFR Parts
74 and 92.

Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices

0

31

0

10

143

Department
of Health
and Human
Services
(HHS)
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health®

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

1/23/2014 11:52 AM