Previous Tips
[December 5, 2013] Does the NIH require Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PDs/PIs) to commit a minimum level of effort on their funding applications and awards? As with all Senior/Key Personnel on NIH projects, the NIH requires that PDs/PIs commit effort greater than zero on their applications and awards. The level of committed effort must be clearly driven and directly informed by the project goals. Some NIH programs may require a minimal level of effort for PDs/PIs and in such instances following the particular Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) instructions on effort levels is critical. (Note that effort reporting at Rockefeller University is managed by Finance.) More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 12/5/2013]
[November 21, 2013] What is the NIH viewing window for electronic applications? The NIH offers applicants 2 business days to view their assembled application in the eRA Commons. This viewing window enables applicants to verify that their application is viewable correctly and, if not, to work with an institutional Signing Official to reject, modify, and resubmit it. Any modifications or corrections must be completed PRIOR to the due date.
NIH due dates are firm deadlines and the closer a submission is to its due date, the less time there is to address critical issues that can stop the processing of your application. In addition, heavy submission traffic close to deadlines can delay the receipt of error messages from Grants.gov and the Commons. This can leave applicants very little, or no time at all to correct any errors and resubmit before the deadline. Remember, if you cannot view your application image correctly in the Commons, neither can the reviewers! With this in mind, applicants are strongly advised to submit early and to allow enough time for an adequate review and for the successful submission of their applications. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 11/21/2013]
[November 7, 2013] Who should be reported as participants on NIH progress reports (electronic and paper)? All individuals working for one calendar month or more on an NIH-funded project must be reported on NIH progress reports, electronic and/or paper. In addition, starting October 2014, NIH will require an eRA Commons ID for all individuals in trainee (graduate and undergraduate student) roles who participate in NIH-funded awards for at least one-person month during the reporting period, whether or not paid by the award. Extending the requirement for eRA Commons IDs to graduate and undergraduate trainees is one of the new ways NIH is using to improve data on the biomedical research workforce and on NIH-supported trainees. NIH is adopting this requirement in phases so as to give grantees and trainees time to register in eRA Commons.
eRA Commons IDs are already required for postdoctoral researchers. As of October 18, 2013 a warning is generated when a Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) is submitted with graduate/undergraduate students who do not have eRA Commons IDs. Once this broader ID requirement is in place, NIH will reject RPPRs lacking IDs for trainees. More participant categories may be added in the future to enable more rigorous monitoring of NIH-supported personnel. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 11/7/2013]
[October 24, 2013] How should I complete the publications section of my NIH Progress Report? All NIH grantees submitting progress reports, whether electronic or paper reports, are required to complete the report’s publication section by using My NCBI (National Center for Biotechnology Information) to generate their publication list.
The electronic progress report, previously known as eSNAP and now called Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR), has the functionality to import relevant publications from an investigator’s MYNCBI to their RPPR. This is done by first associating the grant to the publication in My NCBI (see Associating Funding to your Publications in My NCBI Help) and then associating those publications with the RPPR (see RPPR Instruction Guide).
Paper progress reports for non-SNAP awards (including research, career/fellowship, and other projects submitted on PHS 2590 forms) must include a PDF list of publications that is similarly generated from MYNCBI. (See Creating an Award Compliance Report PDF for your Bibliography in My NCBI Help)
Per NIH, processing of non-competing continuation grant awards will be delayed if publications arising from that award are not in compliance with the NIH requirements. More>>
Previous Joint Tips with the Rita & Frits Markus Library on obtaining PMCID numbers (October 27, 2011), and using My NCBI tool (July 15, 2010). Contact the Rita & Frits Markus Library for assistance with the Public Access process, and/or use of the library-supported PubSubmit. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 10/24/2013]
[October 10, 2013] Why are Principal Investigators (PIs) required to submit a Routing Form before their sponsored funding applications and reports can be submitted by the institution? The Routing Form facilitates verification of your project’s compliance with federal, state, sponsor, and University policies. Serving as a comprehensive and shared checklist of regulatory requirements for applicants and multiple institutional reviewers, the Routing Form enables streamlined and cross-departmental compliance oversight. Therefore, sponsored funding applications and annual reports cannot be submitted before a current Routing Form is complete and signed-off with all the mandatory signatures. More>>[Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 10/10/2013]
[September 26, 2013] What is NIH ASSIST? ASSIST is the new Application Submission System & Interface for Submission Tracking, to be used for preparing and submitting multi-project grant applications electronically to NIH. As with other NIH applications, prior to using ASSIST, applicants should identify a Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) to which they would like to apply. FOAs are posted in the NIH Guide for Grants & Contracts and/or in Grants.gov each of which has robust search capabilities. Active eRA Commons credentials are required to prepare and submit applications using ASSIST, as well as to log in to this system. More info at ASSIST FAQs. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 9/26/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[September 26, 2013] When do I start using ASSIST? The NIH requires the use of ASSIST for electronic submission for all applications intended for due dates on or after September 25, 2013 submitted in response to Funding Opportunity Announcements (FOAs) with the following activity codes: P01, P20, P50, U19, R24, U24. These applications may only be submitted electronically using ASSIST. Other NIH multi-project mechanisms will be transitioning to electronic submission using ASSIST in 2014. InfoEd expects to support electronic submission of NIH multi-project applications to grants.gov via InfoEd in 2014. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 9/26/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[September 12, 2013] What is a compliant salary request on regular funding applications? Unless the sponsor has different requirements, employees' pay levels on all regular funding applications are determined by the institutional base salary paid by the employer for each individual listed on the requested budget. Salary of employees paid by grants may not increase as a result of replacing recurring organizational funds with sponsor's grant funds (e.g. NIH policy). Contact your SR-PD GMS if you need more information. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 9/12/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs and GMS FAQS.
[September 12, 2013] Does NIH have a salary range for research associates who are applying for NIH grant funds? No, NIH does not have a salary range for research associates. Requested salaries are determined in consultation with their mentors and in compliance with institutional policies and any program-specific requirements. NIH does establish stipend levels for undergraduate, predoctoral, and postdoctoral trainees and these ranges could often be referenced by research associates as a salary guide. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 9/12/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs and GMS FAQS.
[August 29, 2013] Is there a time limit on submitting Competing Renewals (CR) to the NIH? Currently, NIH does not have a time limit on CR submissions. However, to avoid a gap it is best to submit your CR one or more review cycles early in case the first submission does not receive a fundable score. Keep in mind that reviewers expect to see accomplishments, and if the research is progressing slowly, it is advisable to wait to get results that could be included in the application. On the other hand, reviewers might be concerned by major gaps between projects because the science might have changed. For more on creating your renewal go to Renewal How To in the NIH Grant Cycle: Application to Renewal. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 8/29/2013; previously sent 6/23/2011] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[August 29, 2013] What is the NIH time limit between the submission of a New, Renewal, or Revision application and a Resubmission (A1 version) of that application? Per NIH policy, a Resubmission that is submitted later than thirty-seven months after the date of receipt ("receipt date") of the initial New, Renewal, or Revision application will not be accepted. The time limit is intended to stimulate new research directions for projects that were not successful initially and may have become outdated over the course of several years. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 8/29/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[August 15, 2013] What should a subgrantee applicant submit to Rockefeller University (RU) if she/he is going to be an applicant on a new NIH application going out from the University (RU is Prime)? When an investigator from another institution is collaborating on an application to be submitted from Rockefeller, that institution, as the anticipated subawardee to RU, must submit the following documentation to SR-PD at least 15 business days before the sponsor’s deadline:
PHS 398 Face Page (Form Page 1) signed by Institutional Official.
A letter of collaboration from the subgrantee investigator.
A brief (up to one page) Statement of Work (SOW) describing the collaborator's proposed research to be performed elsewhere.
A detailed budget for Year 1 (Form Page 4) and a budget page for all years (Form Page 5) of the requested project period; See PHS 398 Instructions (paper submissions) or SF424 Application Guide (e-Submissions).
A budget justification of all items (as per NIH guidelines).
A PHS 398 Checklist Page with her/his institution's latest rate agreement information, compliance assurances and F&A calculations for each budget year.
Latest compliance information for human and animal subjects and/or lab safety as needed.
Vertebrate Animal Section and/or Human Subjects Section of the Research Plan (when applicable). (See PHS 398 instructions)
Biosketches for all key personnel and other significant contributors on your subproject (See PHS 398 Instructions).
A description of the research resources available to the collaborator at her/his home institution.
Any other documentation as requested by The Rockefeller University and the Sponsor. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 8/15/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs and GMS FAQS.
[August 15, 2013] What should a subgrantee applicant submit to Rockefeller University (RU) if she/he is going to be an applicant on a new application to other Sponsors (non-NIH) going out from the University (RU is Prime)? When an investigator from another institution is collaborating on an application to be submitted from Rockefeller, that institution, as the anticipated subawardee to RU, must submit the following documentation to SR-PD at least 15 business days before the sponsor’s deadline:
PHS 398 Face Page (Form Page 1) or Letter of Endorsement signed by Institutional Official.
A letter of collaboration from the subgrantee investigator. (Suggested)
A brief (up to one page) Statement of Work (SOW) describing the collaborator's proposed research to be performed elsewhere.
A detailed budget for all years.
A budget justification of all items.
A PHS 398 Checklist Page.
Latest compliance information for human and animal subjects and/or lab safety as needed.
Biosketches as needed.
A description of the research resources available to the collaborator at her/his home institution.
Any other documentation as requested by The Rockefeller University and the Sponsor. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 8/15/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs andGMS FAQS.
[August 1, 2013] What should a Rockefeller University (RU) investigator submit for SR-PD review if she/he is going to be a subgrant applicant on a new NIH application going out from another institution (RU is subgrantee)? If an RU investigator is collaborating on an application being submitted by another institution, then RU will act as the subawardee to that institution (i.e. the prime). In this case, the following materials should be submitted to SR-PD at least5 business days before the Sponsor's deadline, or earlier, as determined by the Prime's internal deadline:
Completed Routing Form with original, electronic or scanned signatures from the PI and Head of Laboratory (HOL).
A link to any special program announcements as needed.
PHS 398 Face Page (Form Page 1) or Letter of Endorsement signed by Institutional Official.
A letter stating her/his willingness to collaborate on the proposed project.
A brief (up to one page) Statement of Work (SOW) describing the proposed research to be performed at Rockefeller.
A detailed budget for Year 1 (Form Page 4) and a budget page for all years (Form Page 5) of the requested project period; See PHS 398 Instructions (paper submissions) or SF424 Application Guide (e-Submissions).
A budget justification of all items (as per NIH guidelines).
A PHS 398 Checklist Page.
Latest compliance information for human and animal subjects and/or lab safety as needed.
Vertebrate Animal Section and/or Human Subjects Section of the Research Plan (when applicable). (See PHS 398 instructions)
Biosketches for all key personnel and other significant contributors on your subproject (See PHS 398 Instructions).
A description of the resources available to support your subproject (lab, CBC, resource centers).
Any other documentation as requested by the Prime institution and the Sponsor. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 8/1/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs andGMS FAQS.
[August 1, 2013] What should a Rockefeller University (RU) investigator submit for SR-PD review if she/he is going to be a subgrant applicant on a new application to other Sponsors (non-NIH) going out from another institution (RU is subgrantee)? If an RU investigator is collaborating on an application being submitted by another institution, then RU will act as the subawardee to that institution (i.e. the prime). The following materials should be submitted to SR-PD at least 5 business days before the sponsor's deadline, or earlier, as determined by the Prime's internal deadline:
Completed Routing Form with original, electronic or scanned signatures from the PI and Head of Laboratory (HOL).
A copy or link to the sponsor guidelines.
PHS 398 Face Page (Form Page 1) (See PHS 398 instructions) or Letter of Endorsement signed by Institutional Official.
A detailed budget for upcoming budget period, if applicable.
A letter of collaboration from the subgrantee investigator. (Optional)
A brief (up to one page) Statement of Work (SOW) describing the collaborator's proposed research to be performed at Rockefeller.
A detailed budget for all years.
A budget justification of all items.
A PHS 398 Checklist Page.
Latest compliance information for human and animal subjects and/or lab safety as needed.
Biosketches as needed.
A description of the research resources available to the collaborator at her/his home institution.
Any other documentation as requested by the Prime institution and the Sponsor. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 8/1/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs andGMS FAQS.
[June 6, 2013] When should PIs start preparing a response for a Just-In-Time (JIT) request for their NIH applications? While submission of a response to a JIT request must await an email notification from the NIH, the sponsor urges applicants NOT to wait for the JIT request, and to start preparing the JIT information as soon as an application's impact score of 40 or less is released. Unless the JIT request specifies differently, the NIH would expect a complete response within 10 business days of receipt.
The current NIH JIT policy is outlined in the NIH Notice NOT-OD-12-101 (subsection titled 'Reminder of Existing Just-in-Time Requirements'). NIH may delay awards until they are satisfied that all requirements are met, and avoiding delayed and/or incomplete JIT submissions is strongly advised. The NIAID JIT guidelines state that 'If we need to get your award out quickly (for example, at the end of the fiscal year), we may skip over your application if your just-in-time information is not ready. At any time of year, not being ready can mean a delay.' More on Preparing your JIT. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 6/6/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[June 6, 2013] Is Research Support information in an NIH biosketch the same as the Other Support in an NIH/Just-In-Time (JIT) submission? No, information required in the Research Support section of the NIH biosketch is distinctly different from the Other Support information required in an NIH JIT submission; and each is used at different phases of the application cycle for different purposes.
At the submission phase, the Research Support in the biosketch of each of the key personnel on your grant application details scientific accomplishments. The reviewers of your application use this section to assess the qualifications of each Senior/Key Personnel and Other Significant Contributors and of the project team to carry out the proposed research. More in Instructions for Preparing an Application (Section 4.6).
At the JIT phase, the Other Support for each Senior/Key Personnel is required post-review for all applications scored 40 or better. More in NOT-OD-12-101. The details NIH requests at this stage include all active and pending research support with the associated annual direct costs and effort commitments. This section is used to verify that your proposed new project does not overlap with other work that is already funded, and that effort commitments are compliant. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 6/6/2013; previously sent 8/30/12] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[May 23, 2013] Where does the NIH post study section information for my NIH application? The study section assignment for your NIH application, as well as its anticipated review date, will be displayed on the status information screen of your eRA Commons account, as it becomes available, alongside other updates on your application throughout the project life-cycle (more in eRA Commons New Features and Fixes and Release Notes, v.3.7.0.4). Knowing the study section assignment of your application early will allow you to request a change of assignment if you deem initial assignment inappropriate. Being aware of your application review date will enable you to prepare post-submission materials in a timely manner (post-submission materials must be received by the Scientific Review Officer at least 30 days before the peer review meeting). More on eRA Commons’ New Features and Fixes. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 5/23/2013]Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[May 9, 2013] How does a no-cost extension (extension of budget period without additional funding) on a grant affect its compliance status? All awards under a no-cost extension, regardless of sponsor, must comply with all applicable institutional and sponsor’s assurances. These include animal and human subjects protocols, LSC/BL3OC/IBC approvals, paid and unpaid effort commitments of key personnel, and all other compliance requirements associated with the project. Similarly, sponsors’ prior approval requirements during the original award period still apply during the no-cost extension period (see NIH requirements). [earlier version sent Sep 23, 2008] [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 5/9/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[May 9, 2013] What is the time-frame for requesting a first-time No-Cost Extension (NCE) on my NIH grant? If submitted before the grant’s end-date, first-time NIH NCEs are automatically granted upon request through the NIH eRA Commons, provided the award’s terms and conditions allow it. Upon a request from the Principal Investigator, the SR-PD Post-Award Manager will facilitate the NCE process. NIH prior approval is required for any first-time NCE requests submitted after a grant’s end-date. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 5/9/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[April 25, 2013] How is percentile ranking assigned in the NIH peer review related to paylines? The percentile ranking shows the relative position of each application's impact score among all scores assigned by an NIH scientific review group at its current and last two meetings. The NIH's Center for Scientific Review (CSR) is currently recalibrating and adjusting the percentile bases for a number of permanent study sections and Special Emphasis Panels (SEPs). During this transition, revised summary statements will be issued for those applications missing percentile scores.
Paylines are established BEFORE the federal fiscal year and are percentile-based funding cut off points that some, but not all, NIH Institute/Center (IC) publish. Payline calculations are based on the specific IC's estimate of the expected number of grant applications and of its anticipated funding level in the coming fiscal year. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 4/25/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[April 25, 2013] What do the NIH application success rates represent? NIH success rates are calculated AFTER the close of the federal fiscal year and represent the total number of awards made in the previous fiscal year divided by the total number of grant applications (scored and unscored) that were peer reviewed that same year. Actual success rates are normally better than the paylines for any given Institute/Center (IC). NIH success rates by activity code, by IC, by year, and more, are available to the public on the NIH RePORT site. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 4/25/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[April 11, 2013] What should be included in the Project Summary/Abstract of my NIH application? The Project Summary is used to make review assignments, as well as to provide basic information on your project for reviewers and the public. Therefore, the Project Summary/Abstract should outline the broad, long-term goals and specific aims of the project and its biomedical relevance, as well as describe the research design and methods for achieving the project objectives. Since the Project Summary/Abstract will be viewable to the public on the NIH RePORTER if the application is funded, be sure to use lay language, and exclude proprietary or confidential information. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 4/11/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[April 11, 2013] What information should be provided in the Project Narrative section of my NIH application? Investigators should describe the benefits of their proposed research to public health in their Project Narrative section of their NIH application. This section should be succinct – no more than 2-3 sentences long - and in plain language. The Project Narrative is made public for all awarded grants in the NIH RePORTER, appearing at the end of the project abstract. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 4/11/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[March 28, 2013] What is the NIH continuous submission policy for appointed members of NIH review and advisory groups? The NIH continuous submission policy recognizes outstanding review and advisory service by members of the scientific community, and increases incentives to serve. This policy allows appointed members of NIH review and advisory groups, and peer reviewers with substantial service (six times in 18 months), to submit research grant applications (R01, R21, or R34) on a continuous basis, and to have those applications undergo initial peer review in a timely manner. Continuous submission is NOT available for applications submitted for special dates (RFAs, some PARs) or other grant mechanisms. Investigators may verify their eligibility by accessing the NIH Continuous Submission list. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 3/28/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[March 28, 2013] Can the names of potential reviewers be included in the cover letter for my NIH application? While it is important to outline the expertise required to fairly and reasonably evaluate your NIH application, names of potential reviewers should not be listed in your cover letter, unless the specific program guidelines and/or the Scientific Review Official allows this. Investigators are allowed to identify potential reviewers who may be in conflict with your application, such as someone with whom the PI has a longstanding scientific disagreement. For more information on NIH cover letters, see our boilerplate. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 3/28/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[February 28, 2013] What does the NIH consider a ‘Change in Scope’? A change in scope is a change in the direction, aims, objectives, purpose, or type of research training, identified in the approved project. Grantees must obtain prior approval from the NIH for any change in scope. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 2/28/2013]
[February 28, 2013] What is the NIH process for submitting prior approval requests for a change in scope? All requests requiring NIH prior approval must be made in writing (including submission by e-mail) to the NIH at least 30 days before the proposed change. All requests must be signed and submitted by the Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) at SR-PD. Failure to obtain required prior approval from the NIH may result in the disallowance of costs, termination of the award, or other enforcement action within NIH's authority. Whenever PIs contemplate rebudgeting or other post-award changes and are uncertain about the need for prior approval, they are strongly encouraged by the NIH to consult, in advance, with their Program Official and/or Grants Management Officer. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 2/28/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[February 14, 2013] What is the Federal policy regarding significant effort reductions on an active research grant? An effort reduction of 25% or more by individual senior key personnel on a federally funded award is defined as significant (OMB Circular A-110). Different Federal sponsors may interpret ‘key’ differently, applying it only to the Principal Investigator (PI)/Program Director (PD), only to those identified as ‘key’ on the Notice of Award, or to a broader group of senior ‘key’ personnel on the award as designated by the PI/PD. Significant effort reductions of senior key personnel – following a given sponsor’s definition - require prior approvals. Therefore, to ensure compliance across federal sponsors, consult with your specific funder and with SR-PD before significantly reducing effort of individual senior key personnel on your sponsored project.
All requests for prior approvals (e.g. NIH policy) – for effort reductions and otherwise – are reviewed and submitted by the institutional Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) at SR-PD. Effort requirements, as all other award’s terms and conditions, apply throughout the award’s life-time, including during No-Cost Extension (NCE) periods. More on NSF, NIH, and RU effort policies>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 2/14/2013]
[January 31, 2013] Are there any advantages to submitting an NIH application in response to a specific solicitation, i.e. Program Announcement (PA) or Request For Applications (RFA), instead of the Parent Announcement? Yes, if your research is in an area described in a Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) and your study aims meet most of the FOA research criteria, then it would be advisable to submit your proposal to a specific PA/RFA instead of the general Parent Announcement, since the RFA has specific funds associated with the program and funding likelihood may be higher. Some Program Announcements also have set-aside funds (PAS; would be detailed in Section II. Award Information of FOA), and in some cases submissions to a PA will be reviewed by a single study section (PAR). High-priority applications may be funded beyond the payline, especially for PAS submissions. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 1/31/2013; previously sent 9/1/11]
[January 31, 2013] Can an Early Stage Investigator (ESI) status be extended and how? As detailed in NOT-OD-09-034, NIH may consider requests to extend the ESI period for reasons such as medical concerns, disability, family care responsibilities, extended periods of clinical training, natural disasters, and active duty military service. An extension of the ESI period may be requested by investigators at any time after the eRA Commons has displayed their ESI status. Investigators must complete the online Form to request an extension of their ESI status. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 1/31/2013; previously sent 3/3/11]
[January 17, 2013] What is the federal Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR)? The RPPR is an inter-agency initiative to establish a uniform format for interim performance reporting on federally funded research and research-related activities. The official RPPR website is hosted by National Science Foundation (NSF). NIH expects to require use of the RPPR for most SNAP awards and Fellowships in the Spring of 2013, and to pilot the RPPR for non-SNAP awards during calendar year 2013. NIH training materials and other resources are at the NIH RPPR webpage.
The RPPR implementation for the NSF is via Research.gov and will be required beginning on March 18, 2013. At that time, NSF intends to transfer all project reporting from FastLane to Research.gov exclusively. Implementation timetables and other details are available for other federal funders. More>>
Previous SR-PD RPPR tips from July 5, 2012. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 1/17/2013]
[January 3, 2013] How does the NIH's Division of Receipt and Referral (DRR) communicate with applicants? The DRR oversees the processing and assignment of NIH funding applications, and communicates with applicants using an e-notification system. DRR notifications to applicants may occur when: 1) additional information is required before an application can be assigned for review; 2) an applicant’s request for a specific review assignment cannot be met; or 3) the initial DRR screening has determined that an application is noncompliant with NIH requirements.
Using regular email, DRR informs applicants of new correspondence waiting for them in their eRA Commons account. Applicants will find the DRR communication in the ‘Correspondence’ section of the Commons’ detailed status screen for the specific application (top right, under Other Relevant Documents section). Notified investigators are advised to access their eRA Commons account and review the NIH correspondence in a timely manner. These NIH/DRR notifications are frequently only sent to investigators (i.e. without copies to the applicant institution) and often require time-sensitive responses. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 1/3/2013]
Joint Tips with Other Departments
[June 20, 2013] Research Support/SR-PD: Should I include cost estimates for anticipated use of the RU Resource Center products or services in my budget request? Yes. Including the estimated costs for use of University Resource Center products and/or services not only ensures that you indicate the need for these funds but also helps the University better support your research by defraying allowable costs if an award is made and identifying future demands on specific Resource Centers. Information about Resource Center user fees is available on each Center's website. For assistance in estimating the costs associated with Resource Center support for your specific proposed research, contact the Resource Center Director. Indicate the proposed use in your budget justification if a detailed budget is required. Always reference the proposed use of any Resource Center on the associated Routing Form (bottom of section 2). [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 6/20/2013; previously sent 2/1/2012]Posted on SR-PD FAQs andGMS FAQS.
[March 14, 2013] IRB/SR-PD: What changes in the use of human subjects on an active award may be considered a ‘change in scope’ and therefore require prior approval from the NIH? Any change in procedures in an active award that would result in an increased risk to human subjects will require prior NIH approval. This would include an addition or change to the study design/protocol that would result in the need to change the overall human subjects designation or clinical trial designation of the grant; a new inclusion of subject populations that are covered by additional regulatory protections (e.g. pregnant women, human fetuses, and neonates; prisoners; or children); any change to the study protocol that would result in an overall increase in risk level for subjects; new information which indicates a higher level of risk to participants than previously recognized. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 3/14/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[March 14, 2013] IACUC/SR-PD: What changes in the use of animal subjects on an active award may be considered a ‘change in scope’ and therefore require prior approval from the NIH? Any change in research procedures in the use of animal subjects in an active award will require prior NIH approval. This would include substitution of one animal model for another, and any change from an approved use of live vertebrate animals. More>>
Previous SR-PD Tips on prior approvals from February 28, 2013. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 3/14/2013]Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[January 17, 2013] Rita & Frits Markus Library/SR-PD: Could noncompliance with the NIH Public Access policy impact your funding? Yes. Starting in Spring 2013 the NIH can delay the processing of non-competing continuation awards if publications arising from those awards are noncompliant with the NIH Public Access policy. This will coincide with the new NIH RPPR implementation for all Streamlined Non-competing Award Process (SNAP) and Fellowship awards, also anticipated in Spring 2013 (see NIH NOT-OD-12-142). Recent enhancements to NIH's My NCBI are outlined in our previous tip from July 15, 2010. Contact the Rita & Frits Markus Library for assistance with the Public Access process, and/or use the library-supported PubSubmit. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 1/17/2013]
[November 21, 2013] What is the NIH viewing window for electronic applications? The NIH offers applicants 2 business days to view their assembled application in the eRA Commons. This viewing window enables applicants to verify that their application is viewable correctly and, if not, to work with an institutional Signing Official to reject, modify, and resubmit it. Any modifications or corrections must be completed PRIOR to the due date.
NIH due dates are firm deadlines and the closer a submission is to its due date, the less time there is to address critical issues that can stop the processing of your application. In addition, heavy submission traffic close to deadlines can delay the receipt of error messages from Grants.gov and the Commons. This can leave applicants very little, or no time at all to correct any errors and resubmit before the deadline. Remember, if you cannot view your application image correctly in the Commons, neither can the reviewers! With this in mind, applicants are strongly advised to submit early and to allow enough time for an adequate review and for the successful submission of their applications. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 11/21/2013]
[November 7, 2013] Who should be reported as participants on NIH progress reports (electronic and paper)? All individuals working for one calendar month or more on an NIH-funded project must be reported on NIH progress reports, electronic and/or paper. In addition, starting October 2014, NIH will require an eRA Commons ID for all individuals in trainee (graduate and undergraduate student) roles who participate in NIH-funded awards for at least one-person month during the reporting period, whether or not paid by the award. Extending the requirement for eRA Commons IDs to graduate and undergraduate trainees is one of the new ways NIH is using to improve data on the biomedical research workforce and on NIH-supported trainees. NIH is adopting this requirement in phases so as to give grantees and trainees time to register in eRA Commons.
eRA Commons IDs are already required for postdoctoral researchers. As of October 18, 2013 a warning is generated when a Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) is submitted with graduate/undergraduate students who do not have eRA Commons IDs. Once this broader ID requirement is in place, NIH will reject RPPRs lacking IDs for trainees. More participant categories may be added in the future to enable more rigorous monitoring of NIH-supported personnel. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 11/7/2013]
[October 24, 2013] How should I complete the publications section of my NIH Progress Report? All NIH grantees submitting progress reports, whether electronic or paper reports, are required to complete the report’s publication section by using My NCBI (National Center for Biotechnology Information) to generate their publication list.
The electronic progress report, previously known as eSNAP and now called Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR), has the functionality to import relevant publications from an investigator’s MYNCBI to their RPPR. This is done by first associating the grant to the publication in My NCBI (see Associating Funding to your Publications in My NCBI Help) and then associating those publications with the RPPR (see RPPR Instruction Guide).
Paper progress reports for non-SNAP awards (including research, career/fellowship, and other projects submitted on PHS 2590 forms) must include a PDF list of publications that is similarly generated from MYNCBI. (See Creating an Award Compliance Report PDF for your Bibliography in My NCBI Help)
Per NIH, processing of non-competing continuation grant awards will be delayed if publications arising from that award are not in compliance with the NIH requirements. More>>
Previous Joint Tips with the Rita & Frits Markus Library on obtaining PMCID numbers (October 27, 2011), and using My NCBI tool (July 15, 2010). Contact the Rita & Frits Markus Library for assistance with the Public Access process, and/or use of the library-supported PubSubmit. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 10/24/2013]
[October 10, 2013] Why are Principal Investigators (PIs) required to submit a Routing Form before their sponsored funding applications and reports can be submitted by the institution? The Routing Form facilitates verification of your project’s compliance with federal, state, sponsor, and University policies. Serving as a comprehensive and shared checklist of regulatory requirements for applicants and multiple institutional reviewers, the Routing Form enables streamlined and cross-departmental compliance oversight. Therefore, sponsored funding applications and annual reports cannot be submitted before a current Routing Form is complete and signed-off with all the mandatory signatures. More>>[Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 10/10/2013]
[September 26, 2013] What is NIH ASSIST? ASSIST is the new Application Submission System & Interface for Submission Tracking, to be used for preparing and submitting multi-project grant applications electronically to NIH. As with other NIH applications, prior to using ASSIST, applicants should identify a Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) to which they would like to apply. FOAs are posted in the NIH Guide for Grants & Contracts and/or in Grants.gov each of which has robust search capabilities. Active eRA Commons credentials are required to prepare and submit applications using ASSIST, as well as to log in to this system. More info at ASSIST FAQs. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 9/26/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[September 26, 2013] When do I start using ASSIST? The NIH requires the use of ASSIST for electronic submission for all applications intended for due dates on or after September 25, 2013 submitted in response to Funding Opportunity Announcements (FOAs) with the following activity codes: P01, P20, P50, U19, R24, U24. These applications may only be submitted electronically using ASSIST. Other NIH multi-project mechanisms will be transitioning to electronic submission using ASSIST in 2014. InfoEd expects to support electronic submission of NIH multi-project applications to grants.gov via InfoEd in 2014. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 9/26/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[September 12, 2013] What is a compliant salary request on regular funding applications? Unless the sponsor has different requirements, employees' pay levels on all regular funding applications are determined by the institutional base salary paid by the employer for each individual listed on the requested budget. Salary of employees paid by grants may not increase as a result of replacing recurring organizational funds with sponsor's grant funds (e.g. NIH policy). Contact your SR-PD GMS if you need more information. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 9/12/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs and GMS FAQS.
[September 12, 2013] Does NIH have a salary range for research associates who are applying for NIH grant funds? No, NIH does not have a salary range for research associates. Requested salaries are determined in consultation with their mentors and in compliance with institutional policies and any program-specific requirements. NIH does establish stipend levels for undergraduate, predoctoral, and postdoctoral trainees and these ranges could often be referenced by research associates as a salary guide. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 9/12/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs and GMS FAQS.
[August 29, 2013] Is there a time limit on submitting Competing Renewals (CR) to the NIH? Currently, NIH does not have a time limit on CR submissions. However, to avoid a gap it is best to submit your CR one or more review cycles early in case the first submission does not receive a fundable score. Keep in mind that reviewers expect to see accomplishments, and if the research is progressing slowly, it is advisable to wait to get results that could be included in the application. On the other hand, reviewers might be concerned by major gaps between projects because the science might have changed. For more on creating your renewal go to Renewal How To in the NIH Grant Cycle: Application to Renewal. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 8/29/2013; previously sent 6/23/2011] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[August 29, 2013] What is the NIH time limit between the submission of a New, Renewal, or Revision application and a Resubmission (A1 version) of that application? Per NIH policy, a Resubmission that is submitted later than thirty-seven months after the date of receipt ("receipt date") of the initial New, Renewal, or Revision application will not be accepted. The time limit is intended to stimulate new research directions for projects that were not successful initially and may have become outdated over the course of several years. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 8/29/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[August 15, 2013] What should a subgrantee applicant submit to Rockefeller University (RU) if she/he is going to be an applicant on a new NIH application going out from the University (RU is Prime)? When an investigator from another institution is collaborating on an application to be submitted from Rockefeller, that institution, as the anticipated subawardee to RU, must submit the following documentation to SR-PD at least 15 business days before the sponsor’s deadline:
PHS 398 Face Page (Form Page 1) signed by Institutional Official.
A letter of collaboration from the subgrantee investigator.
A brief (up to one page) Statement of Work (SOW) describing the collaborator's proposed research to be performed elsewhere.
A detailed budget for Year 1 (Form Page 4) and a budget page for all years (Form Page 5) of the requested project period; See PHS 398 Instructions (paper submissions) or SF424 Application Guide (e-Submissions).
A budget justification of all items (as per NIH guidelines).
A PHS 398 Checklist Page with her/his institution's latest rate agreement information, compliance assurances and F&A calculations for each budget year.
Latest compliance information for human and animal subjects and/or lab safety as needed.
Vertebrate Animal Section and/or Human Subjects Section of the Research Plan (when applicable). (See PHS 398 instructions)
Biosketches for all key personnel and other significant contributors on your subproject (See PHS 398 Instructions).
A description of the research resources available to the collaborator at her/his home institution.
Any other documentation as requested by The Rockefeller University and the Sponsor. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 8/15/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs and GMS FAQS.
[August 15, 2013] What should a subgrantee applicant submit to Rockefeller University (RU) if she/he is going to be an applicant on a new application to other Sponsors (non-NIH) going out from the University (RU is Prime)? When an investigator from another institution is collaborating on an application to be submitted from Rockefeller, that institution, as the anticipated subawardee to RU, must submit the following documentation to SR-PD at least 15 business days before the sponsor’s deadline:
PHS 398 Face Page (Form Page 1) or Letter of Endorsement signed by Institutional Official.
A letter of collaboration from the subgrantee investigator. (Suggested)
A brief (up to one page) Statement of Work (SOW) describing the collaborator's proposed research to be performed elsewhere.
A detailed budget for all years.
A budget justification of all items.
A PHS 398 Checklist Page.
Latest compliance information for human and animal subjects and/or lab safety as needed.
Biosketches as needed.
A description of the research resources available to the collaborator at her/his home institution.
Any other documentation as requested by The Rockefeller University and the Sponsor. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 8/15/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs andGMS FAQS.
[August 1, 2013] What should a Rockefeller University (RU) investigator submit for SR-PD review if she/he is going to be a subgrant applicant on a new NIH application going out from another institution (RU is subgrantee)? If an RU investigator is collaborating on an application being submitted by another institution, then RU will act as the subawardee to that institution (i.e. the prime). In this case, the following materials should be submitted to SR-PD at least5 business days before the Sponsor's deadline, or earlier, as determined by the Prime's internal deadline:
Completed Routing Form with original, electronic or scanned signatures from the PI and Head of Laboratory (HOL).
A link to any special program announcements as needed.
PHS 398 Face Page (Form Page 1) or Letter of Endorsement signed by Institutional Official.
A letter stating her/his willingness to collaborate on the proposed project.
A brief (up to one page) Statement of Work (SOW) describing the proposed research to be performed at Rockefeller.
A detailed budget for Year 1 (Form Page 4) and a budget page for all years (Form Page 5) of the requested project period; See PHS 398 Instructions (paper submissions) or SF424 Application Guide (e-Submissions).
A budget justification of all items (as per NIH guidelines).
A PHS 398 Checklist Page.
Latest compliance information for human and animal subjects and/or lab safety as needed.
Vertebrate Animal Section and/or Human Subjects Section of the Research Plan (when applicable). (See PHS 398 instructions)
Biosketches for all key personnel and other significant contributors on your subproject (See PHS 398 Instructions).
A description of the resources available to support your subproject (lab, CBC, resource centers).
Any other documentation as requested by the Prime institution and the Sponsor. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 8/1/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs andGMS FAQS.
[August 1, 2013] What should a Rockefeller University (RU) investigator submit for SR-PD review if she/he is going to be a subgrant applicant on a new application to other Sponsors (non-NIH) going out from another institution (RU is subgrantee)? If an RU investigator is collaborating on an application being submitted by another institution, then RU will act as the subawardee to that institution (i.e. the prime). The following materials should be submitted to SR-PD at least 5 business days before the sponsor's deadline, or earlier, as determined by the Prime's internal deadline:
Completed Routing Form with original, electronic or scanned signatures from the PI and Head of Laboratory (HOL).
A copy or link to the sponsor guidelines.
PHS 398 Face Page (Form Page 1) (See PHS 398 instructions) or Letter of Endorsement signed by Institutional Official.
A detailed budget for upcoming budget period, if applicable.
A letter of collaboration from the subgrantee investigator. (Optional)
A brief (up to one page) Statement of Work (SOW) describing the collaborator's proposed research to be performed at Rockefeller.
A detailed budget for all years.
A budget justification of all items.
A PHS 398 Checklist Page.
Latest compliance information for human and animal subjects and/or lab safety as needed.
Biosketches as needed.
A description of the research resources available to the collaborator at her/his home institution.
Any other documentation as requested by the Prime institution and the Sponsor. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 8/1/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs andGMS FAQS.
[June 6, 2013] When should PIs start preparing a response for a Just-In-Time (JIT) request for their NIH applications? While submission of a response to a JIT request must await an email notification from the NIH, the sponsor urges applicants NOT to wait for the JIT request, and to start preparing the JIT information as soon as an application's impact score of 40 or less is released. Unless the JIT request specifies differently, the NIH would expect a complete response within 10 business days of receipt.
The current NIH JIT policy is outlined in the NIH Notice NOT-OD-12-101 (subsection titled 'Reminder of Existing Just-in-Time Requirements'). NIH may delay awards until they are satisfied that all requirements are met, and avoiding delayed and/or incomplete JIT submissions is strongly advised. The NIAID JIT guidelines state that 'If we need to get your award out quickly (for example, at the end of the fiscal year), we may skip over your application if your just-in-time information is not ready. At any time of year, not being ready can mean a delay.' More on Preparing your JIT. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 6/6/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[June 6, 2013] Is Research Support information in an NIH biosketch the same as the Other Support in an NIH/Just-In-Time (JIT) submission? No, information required in the Research Support section of the NIH biosketch is distinctly different from the Other Support information required in an NIH JIT submission; and each is used at different phases of the application cycle for different purposes.
At the submission phase, the Research Support in the biosketch of each of the key personnel on your grant application details scientific accomplishments. The reviewers of your application use this section to assess the qualifications of each Senior/Key Personnel and Other Significant Contributors and of the project team to carry out the proposed research. More in Instructions for Preparing an Application (Section 4.6).
At the JIT phase, the Other Support for each Senior/Key Personnel is required post-review for all applications scored 40 or better. More in NOT-OD-12-101. The details NIH requests at this stage include all active and pending research support with the associated annual direct costs and effort commitments. This section is used to verify that your proposed new project does not overlap with other work that is already funded, and that effort commitments are compliant. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 6/6/2013; previously sent 8/30/12] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[May 23, 2013] Where does the NIH post study section information for my NIH application? The study section assignment for your NIH application, as well as its anticipated review date, will be displayed on the status information screen of your eRA Commons account, as it becomes available, alongside other updates on your application throughout the project life-cycle (more in eRA Commons New Features and Fixes and Release Notes, v.3.7.0.4). Knowing the study section assignment of your application early will allow you to request a change of assignment if you deem initial assignment inappropriate. Being aware of your application review date will enable you to prepare post-submission materials in a timely manner (post-submission materials must be received by the Scientific Review Officer at least 30 days before the peer review meeting). More on eRA Commons’ New Features and Fixes. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 5/23/2013]Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[May 9, 2013] How does a no-cost extension (extension of budget period without additional funding) on a grant affect its compliance status? All awards under a no-cost extension, regardless of sponsor, must comply with all applicable institutional and sponsor’s assurances. These include animal and human subjects protocols, LSC/BL3OC/IBC approvals, paid and unpaid effort commitments of key personnel, and all other compliance requirements associated with the project. Similarly, sponsors’ prior approval requirements during the original award period still apply during the no-cost extension period (see NIH requirements). [earlier version sent Sep 23, 2008] [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 5/9/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[May 9, 2013] What is the time-frame for requesting a first-time No-Cost Extension (NCE) on my NIH grant? If submitted before the grant’s end-date, first-time NIH NCEs are automatically granted upon request through the NIH eRA Commons, provided the award’s terms and conditions allow it. Upon a request from the Principal Investigator, the SR-PD Post-Award Manager will facilitate the NCE process. NIH prior approval is required for any first-time NCE requests submitted after a grant’s end-date. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 5/9/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[April 25, 2013] How is percentile ranking assigned in the NIH peer review related to paylines? The percentile ranking shows the relative position of each application's impact score among all scores assigned by an NIH scientific review group at its current and last two meetings. The NIH's Center for Scientific Review (CSR) is currently recalibrating and adjusting the percentile bases for a number of permanent study sections and Special Emphasis Panels (SEPs). During this transition, revised summary statements will be issued for those applications missing percentile scores.
Paylines are established BEFORE the federal fiscal year and are percentile-based funding cut off points that some, but not all, NIH Institute/Center (IC) publish. Payline calculations are based on the specific IC's estimate of the expected number of grant applications and of its anticipated funding level in the coming fiscal year. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 4/25/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[April 25, 2013] What do the NIH application success rates represent? NIH success rates are calculated AFTER the close of the federal fiscal year and represent the total number of awards made in the previous fiscal year divided by the total number of grant applications (scored and unscored) that were peer reviewed that same year. Actual success rates are normally better than the paylines for any given Institute/Center (IC). NIH success rates by activity code, by IC, by year, and more, are available to the public on the NIH RePORT site. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 4/25/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[April 11, 2013] What should be included in the Project Summary/Abstract of my NIH application? The Project Summary is used to make review assignments, as well as to provide basic information on your project for reviewers and the public. Therefore, the Project Summary/Abstract should outline the broad, long-term goals and specific aims of the project and its biomedical relevance, as well as describe the research design and methods for achieving the project objectives. Since the Project Summary/Abstract will be viewable to the public on the NIH RePORTER if the application is funded, be sure to use lay language, and exclude proprietary or confidential information. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 4/11/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[April 11, 2013] What information should be provided in the Project Narrative section of my NIH application? Investigators should describe the benefits of their proposed research to public health in their Project Narrative section of their NIH application. This section should be succinct – no more than 2-3 sentences long - and in plain language. The Project Narrative is made public for all awarded grants in the NIH RePORTER, appearing at the end of the project abstract. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 4/11/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[March 28, 2013] What is the NIH continuous submission policy for appointed members of NIH review and advisory groups? The NIH continuous submission policy recognizes outstanding review and advisory service by members of the scientific community, and increases incentives to serve. This policy allows appointed members of NIH review and advisory groups, and peer reviewers with substantial service (six times in 18 months), to submit research grant applications (R01, R21, or R34) on a continuous basis, and to have those applications undergo initial peer review in a timely manner. Continuous submission is NOT available for applications submitted for special dates (RFAs, some PARs) or other grant mechanisms. Investigators may verify their eligibility by accessing the NIH Continuous Submission list. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 3/28/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[March 28, 2013] Can the names of potential reviewers be included in the cover letter for my NIH application? While it is important to outline the expertise required to fairly and reasonably evaluate your NIH application, names of potential reviewers should not be listed in your cover letter, unless the specific program guidelines and/or the Scientific Review Official allows this. Investigators are allowed to identify potential reviewers who may be in conflict with your application, such as someone with whom the PI has a longstanding scientific disagreement. For more information on NIH cover letters, see our boilerplate. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 3/28/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[February 28, 2013] What does the NIH consider a ‘Change in Scope’? A change in scope is a change in the direction, aims, objectives, purpose, or type of research training, identified in the approved project. Grantees must obtain prior approval from the NIH for any change in scope. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 2/28/2013]
[February 28, 2013] What is the NIH process for submitting prior approval requests for a change in scope? All requests requiring NIH prior approval must be made in writing (including submission by e-mail) to the NIH at least 30 days before the proposed change. All requests must be signed and submitted by the Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) at SR-PD. Failure to obtain required prior approval from the NIH may result in the disallowance of costs, termination of the award, or other enforcement action within NIH's authority. Whenever PIs contemplate rebudgeting or other post-award changes and are uncertain about the need for prior approval, they are strongly encouraged by the NIH to consult, in advance, with their Program Official and/or Grants Management Officer. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 2/28/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[February 14, 2013] What is the Federal policy regarding significant effort reductions on an active research grant? An effort reduction of 25% or more by individual senior key personnel on a federally funded award is defined as significant (OMB Circular A-110). Different Federal sponsors may interpret ‘key’ differently, applying it only to the Principal Investigator (PI)/Program Director (PD), only to those identified as ‘key’ on the Notice of Award, or to a broader group of senior ‘key’ personnel on the award as designated by the PI/PD. Significant effort reductions of senior key personnel – following a given sponsor’s definition - require prior approvals. Therefore, to ensure compliance across federal sponsors, consult with your specific funder and with SR-PD before significantly reducing effort of individual senior key personnel on your sponsored project.
All requests for prior approvals (e.g. NIH policy) – for effort reductions and otherwise – are reviewed and submitted by the institutional Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) at SR-PD. Effort requirements, as all other award’s terms and conditions, apply throughout the award’s life-time, including during No-Cost Extension (NCE) periods. More on NSF, NIH, and RU effort policies>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 2/14/2013]
[January 31, 2013] Are there any advantages to submitting an NIH application in response to a specific solicitation, i.e. Program Announcement (PA) or Request For Applications (RFA), instead of the Parent Announcement? Yes, if your research is in an area described in a Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) and your study aims meet most of the FOA research criteria, then it would be advisable to submit your proposal to a specific PA/RFA instead of the general Parent Announcement, since the RFA has specific funds associated with the program and funding likelihood may be higher. Some Program Announcements also have set-aside funds (PAS; would be detailed in Section II. Award Information of FOA), and in some cases submissions to a PA will be reviewed by a single study section (PAR). High-priority applications may be funded beyond the payline, especially for PAS submissions. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 1/31/2013; previously sent 9/1/11]
[January 31, 2013] Can an Early Stage Investigator (ESI) status be extended and how? As detailed in NOT-OD-09-034, NIH may consider requests to extend the ESI period for reasons such as medical concerns, disability, family care responsibilities, extended periods of clinical training, natural disasters, and active duty military service. An extension of the ESI period may be requested by investigators at any time after the eRA Commons has displayed their ESI status. Investigators must complete the online Form to request an extension of their ESI status. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 1/31/2013; previously sent 3/3/11]
[January 17, 2013] What is the federal Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR)? The RPPR is an inter-agency initiative to establish a uniform format for interim performance reporting on federally funded research and research-related activities. The official RPPR website is hosted by National Science Foundation (NSF). NIH expects to require use of the RPPR for most SNAP awards and Fellowships in the Spring of 2013, and to pilot the RPPR for non-SNAP awards during calendar year 2013. NIH training materials and other resources are at the NIH RPPR webpage.
The RPPR implementation for the NSF is via Research.gov and will be required beginning on March 18, 2013. At that time, NSF intends to transfer all project reporting from FastLane to Research.gov exclusively. Implementation timetables and other details are available for other federal funders. More>>
Previous SR-PD RPPR tips from July 5, 2012. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 1/17/2013]
[January 3, 2013] How does the NIH's Division of Receipt and Referral (DRR) communicate with applicants? The DRR oversees the processing and assignment of NIH funding applications, and communicates with applicants using an e-notification system. DRR notifications to applicants may occur when: 1) additional information is required before an application can be assigned for review; 2) an applicant’s request for a specific review assignment cannot be met; or 3) the initial DRR screening has determined that an application is noncompliant with NIH requirements.
Using regular email, DRR informs applicants of new correspondence waiting for them in their eRA Commons account. Applicants will find the DRR communication in the ‘Correspondence’ section of the Commons’ detailed status screen for the specific application (top right, under Other Relevant Documents section). Notified investigators are advised to access their eRA Commons account and review the NIH correspondence in a timely manner. These NIH/DRR notifications are frequently only sent to investigators (i.e. without copies to the applicant institution) and often require time-sensitive responses. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 1/3/2013]
Joint Tips with Other Departments
[June 20, 2013] Research Support/SR-PD: Should I include cost estimates for anticipated use of the RU Resource Center products or services in my budget request? Yes. Including the estimated costs for use of University Resource Center products and/or services not only ensures that you indicate the need for these funds but also helps the University better support your research by defraying allowable costs if an award is made and identifying future demands on specific Resource Centers. Information about Resource Center user fees is available on each Center's website. For assistance in estimating the costs associated with Resource Center support for your specific proposed research, contact the Resource Center Director. Indicate the proposed use in your budget justification if a detailed budget is required. Always reference the proposed use of any Resource Center on the associated Routing Form (bottom of section 2). [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 6/20/2013; previously sent 2/1/2012]Posted on SR-PD FAQs andGMS FAQS.
[March 14, 2013] IRB/SR-PD: What changes in the use of human subjects on an active award may be considered a ‘change in scope’ and therefore require prior approval from the NIH? Any change in procedures in an active award that would result in an increased risk to human subjects will require prior NIH approval. This would include an addition or change to the study design/protocol that would result in the need to change the overall human subjects designation or clinical trial designation of the grant; a new inclusion of subject populations that are covered by additional regulatory protections (e.g. pregnant women, human fetuses, and neonates; prisoners; or children); any change to the study protocol that would result in an overall increase in risk level for subjects; new information which indicates a higher level of risk to participants than previously recognized. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 3/14/2013] Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[March 14, 2013] IACUC/SR-PD: What changes in the use of animal subjects on an active award may be considered a ‘change in scope’ and therefore require prior approval from the NIH? Any change in research procedures in the use of animal subjects in an active award will require prior NIH approval. This would include substitution of one animal model for another, and any change from an approved use of live vertebrate animals. More>>
Previous SR-PD Tips on prior approvals from February 28, 2013. [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 3/14/2013]Posted on SR-PD FAQs.
[January 17, 2013] Rita & Frits Markus Library/SR-PD: Could noncompliance with the NIH Public Access policy impact your funding? Yes. Starting in Spring 2013 the NIH can delay the processing of non-competing continuation awards if publications arising from those awards are noncompliant with the NIH Public Access policy. This will coincide with the new NIH RPPR implementation for all Streamlined Non-competing Award Process (SNAP) and Fellowship awards, also anticipated in Spring 2013 (see NIH NOT-OD-12-142). Recent enhancements to NIH's My NCBI are outlined in our previous tip from July 15, 2010. Contact the Rita & Frits Markus Library for assistance with the Public Access process, and/or use the library-supported PubSubmit. More>> [Faculty, Postdocs and Resadmin 1/17/2013]
