National Institutes of Health (NIH)
National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB)
Funding Opportunity Title
Decreasing Patient Radiation Dose from CT Imaging: Achieving Sub-mSv Studies (U01)
U01 Research Project – Cooperative Agreement
Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Number
Companion Funding Opportunity
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s)
Funding Opportunity Purpose
Computed tomography (CT)-based imaging procedures have led to significant improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of numerous medical conditions and diseases. However, CT scanners can expose patients to cumulative radiation doses which may elevate individuals’ lifetime risk of developing cancer or other health problems. Physicians minimize this potential risk by carefully considering the risk-to-benefit-ratio of a CT scan as well as alternative diagnostic approaches. Research focusing on ways to reduce the radiation dose from CT scanning, while still providing the superior image quality, could shift this ratio further to the benefit side. The purpose of this FOA is to encourage research leading to reduction of patient radiation exposure from a CT scan. The goal of this FOA is that research outcomes will result in routine CT scan patient radiation exposures of less than one mSv.
June 13, 2012
Open Date (Earliest Submission Date)
August 11, 2012, August 11, 2013, August 11, 2014
Letter of Intent Due Date
August 11, 2012, August 11, 2013, August 11, 2014
Application Due Date(s)
September 11, 2012, September 11, 2013, September 11, 2014, by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization.
AIDS Application Due Date(s)
Scientific Merit Review
Advisory Council Review
Earliest Start Date(s)
July 2013, July 2014, July 2015
September 12, 2014
Due Dates for E.O. 12372
Required Application Instructions
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this FOA or in a Notice from the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts). Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions. Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
Part 1. Overview Information
Part 2. Full Text of the Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
Section II. Award Information
Section III. Eligibility Information
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
Section V. Application Review Information
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Section VII. Agency Contacts
Section VIII. Other Information
Computed tomography (CT)-based imaging procedures have led to significant improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of numerous medical conditions and diseases. However, CT scanners can expose patients to cumulative radiation doses which may elevate individuals’ lifetime risk of developing cancer or other health problems. Physicians minimize this potential risk by carefully considering the risk-to-benefit-ratio of a CT scan as well as alternative diagnostic approaches. Research focusing on ways to reduce the radiation dose from a CT scan, while still providing the superior image quality, could shift this ratio further to the benefit side. The purpose of this FOA is to encourage research leading to reduction of patient radiation exposure from a CT scan. The goal of this FOA is to achieve research outcomes that will result in routine CT scan patient radiation exposures of less than one mSv.
Since its inception, CT has represented a valuable medical imaging tool for differentiation of subtle differences in imaged tissue contrast corresponding to actual anatomical features and pathologies. The continued medical importance of CT is evidenced by annual increases in the number of CT scans performed. CT scans now account for about one in five radiation-based imaging procedures and these scans are responsible for nearly 50% of the radiation exposure from medical imaging in the U.S.
CT, along with other advanced imaging modalities, has had a significant impact on patient care, markedly changing the way medicine is practiced. For example, CT has had a tremendous impact on cancer and emergency medicine. CT data are routinely incorporated into treatment planning for radiation oncology. The number of emergency department visits in which a CT scan was performed increased by approximately 6-fold from 1995 to 2007. It has been suggested that CT scans performed in an emergency department help reduce the frequency of hospitalizations or transfers to another facility.
While CT has revolutionized the practice of medicine, it has also contributed to the significant increase in U.S. annual per capita effective radiation dose. The individual radiation dose to an individual resulting from medical sources increased from 0.53 mSv in 1980 to 3.0 mSv in 2006. In particular, the contribution from CT has increased from 0.03 mSv to 1.47 mSv.
The risk to an individual of developing a radiation-related cancer from any single medical imaging procedure is difficult to quantify, but estimated to be small. The most studied cohorts of individuals with radiation-related cancers are from nuclear worker and atomic bomb investigations, which are not directly relevant to clinical radiation exposure from imaging studies. There is uncertainty about how to model and extrapolate these experiences to medical imaging exposures. However, it is reasonable to conclude that less radiation exposure is better than more radiation exposure. This has been codified in the “As Low As Reasonably Achievable” (ALARA) policy which is widely recommended for clinical imaging.
A series of initiatives have been implemented to address the increase in annual per capita radiation dose from CT, including the collection and comparison of radiation doses and scan nomenclature across practices. Professional societies have collaboratively developed campaigns to promote reduction in the amount of radiation used for medically necessary imaging studies and elimination of unnecessary procedures. In addition, CT manufacturers are introducing innovative reconstruction methods and technologies to reduce radiation doses.
In February 2011, a meeting cosponsored by the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering was held at the National Institutes of Health to identify possible steps that could be taken to reduce the average patient exposure from each CT exam to less than 1 mSv. Meeting participants suggested many possible changes in clinical imaging practices, which included improvements in data acquisition, image reconstruction, and optimization processes as important areas of research to achieve sub-mSv effective dose CT imaging. Also, they agreed that engagement of users, investigators, and manufacturer communities would be important to achieving the implementation of reducing patient radiation exposure from CT scanning to the lowest levels possible, without sacrificing diagnostic image quality. Meeting attendees concurred that achieving the lowest possible patient radiation exposures from CT scans would require a multi-faceted approach.
This FOA seeks meritorious research to achieve the goal of sub-mSv patient radiation exposure for CT examinations. The scope of this PAR is limited to research in CT scanner technology and CT image reconstruction method and/or algorithm improvements that could realistically and significantly reduce patient radiation exposure, while maintaining high image quality. Collaborations between academic and industry researchers are encouraged when appropriate. Proposed research outcomes leading to significant reductions in exposures from CT examinations should be scientifically generalizable across multiple manufacturers’ CT platforms, anatomic imaging sites (e.g., head, chest, abdomen, pelvis), and populations (e.g., different patient sizes, ages). Applications should address CT image quality in the context of the radiation dose reduction research strategy.
Examples of research topics within the scope of this FOA to lower radiation exposures from CT scanners include (but are not limited to) developing or improving technology related to:
Applicants to this FOA may wish to propose research strategies that incorporate more than one area of improvement to CT scanner technology, CT image reconstruction method and/or algorithm design that will lead to CT imaging studies at the sub-mSv level.
Examples of research topics that are NOT within the scope of this FOA, include (but are not limited to) evaluation of alternative non-radiation based imaging modalities; enhancements to referring and imaging physician decision making for selection of optimal diagnostic studies; and contrast agent research. Investigators whose research focuses on these areas or means of reducing CT radiation exposures other than through improvements in CT scanner technology and CT image reconstruction method and/or algorithm improvements are strongly encouraged to communicate with the scientific contact(s) listed below to explore support mechanisms other than this PAR.
Application Types Allowed
The OER Glossary and the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide provide details on these application types.
Funds Available and Anticipated Number of Awards
The number of awards is contingent upon NIH appropriations, and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
Application budgets are not limited, but need to reflect actual needs of the proposed project.
Award Project Period
The total project period for an application submitted in response to this funding opportunity may not exceed four years.
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made in response to this FOA.
Higher Education Institutions
The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
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.
Applicant organizations must complete the following registrations
as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply
for or receive an award. Applicants must have a valid Dun and Bradstreet
Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number in order to begin each of the following
All Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s))
must also work with their institutional officials to register with the eRA
Commons or ensure their existing eRA Commons account is affiliated with the eRA
Commons account of the applicant organization.
All registrations must be completed by the application due date. Applicant organizations are strongly encouraged to start the registration process at least 4-6 weeks prior to the application due date.
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(s)/Principal Investigator(s) Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide.
This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct.
NIH will not accept any application in response to this FOA that is essentially the same as one currently pending initial peer review unless the applicant withdraws the pending application. NIH will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one already reviewed. Resubmission applications may be submitted, according to the NIH Policy on Resubmission Applications from the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Applicants must download the SF424 (R&R) application package associated with this funding opportunity using the “Apply for Grant Electronically” button in this FOA or following the directions provided at Grants.gov.
It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, except where instructed in this funding opportunity announcement to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
For information on Application Submission and Receipt, visit Frequently Asked Questions – Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications.
Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information that it contains allows NIH staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review.
By the date listed in Part 1. Overview Information, prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:
The letter of intent should be sent to:
Hector Lopez, Sc.D.
National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
6707 Democracy Blvd. Suite 200
Bethesda, MD 20892
The forms package associated with this FOA includes all applicable components, mandatory and optional. Please note that some components marked optional in the application package are required for submission of applications for this FOA. Follow all instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide to ensure you complete all appropriate “optional” components.
All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
It is recommended that applications include in their budgets, travel funds for the Program Director/Principal Investigator and a co-investigator to participate in an annual meeting in the Washington, DC area to be convened by NIBIB with the purpose of exchanging information and fostering collaboration among the groups funded through this FOA.
All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Resource Sharing Plan
Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans (Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model Organisms, and Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS)) as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide,
Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates. Applicants are encouraged to submit in advance of the deadline to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission.
Organizations must submit applications via Grants.gov, the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies. Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH’s electronic system for grants administration.
Applicants are responsible for viewing their application in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.
Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.
Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.
For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit Applying Electronically.
All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile Component of the SF 424(R&R) Application Package. Failure to register in the Commons and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the successful submission of an electronic application to NIH.
The applicant organization must ensure that the DUNS number it provides on the application is the same number used in the organization’s profile in the eRA Commons and for the Central Contractor Registration (CCR). Additional information may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
See more tips for avoiding common errors.
Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness by the Center for Scientific Review, NIH. Applications that are incomplete will not be reviewed.
Applicants requesting $500,000 or more in direct costs in any year (excluding consortium F&A) must contact NIH program staff at least 6 weeks before submitting the application and follow the Policy on the Acceptance for Review of Unsolicited Applications that Request $500,000 or More in Direct Costs as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in NOT-OD-10-115.
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. As part of the NIH mission, all applications submitted to the NIH in support of biomedical and behavioral research are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.
Reviewers will provide an overall impact/priority score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit, and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field? If the long term goals of the project are accomplished, will this result in a significant reduction in average radiation dose from a CT scan? Will the research outcomes be generalizable across multiple CT platforms, anatomic imaging sites (e.g., head, chest, abdomen, pelvis), and populations (e.g., different patient weights and ages)?
Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or New Investigators, or in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD(s)/PI(s), do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project? How will the research team include CT users and/or manufacturers, if appropriate?
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?
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses
well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project?
Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success
presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the
strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? If the application addresses or evaluates CT image quality in the context of the radiation
dose reduction research strategy, are the image quality measurements and
methods objective and appropriate?
If the project involves clinical research, are the plans for 1) protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion of minorities and members of both sexes/genders, as well as the inclusion of children, justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact/priority score, but will not give separate scores for these items.
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 Human Subjects Protection and Inclusion Guidelines.
Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children
When the proposed project involves clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion of minorities and members of both genders, as well as the inclusion of children. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Human Subjects Protection and Inclusion Guidelines.
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.
Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.
For Resubmissions, the committee will evaluate the application as now presented, taking into consideration the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group and changes made to the project.
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items, and should not consider them in providing an overall impact/priority score.
Applications from Foreign Organizations
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: Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model Organisms, and Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS).
Budget and Period of Support
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s), convened by the NIBIB in accordance with NIH peer review policy and procedures, using the stated review criteria. Review assignments will be shown in the eRA Commons.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications:
Applications will be assigned on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the National Advisory Council for Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD(s)/PI(s) will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) via the eRA Commons.
Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH
will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as
described in the NIH Grants
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, CCR Registration, and Transparency Act requirements as noted on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website.
All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities. More information is provided at Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants.
Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award
The following special terms of award are in addition to, and
not in lieu of, otherwise applicable OMB administrative guidelines, HHS 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:
The Program Director/Principal Investigator will have the
primary responsibility for: defining objectives and approaches, and to plan,
conduct, analyze, and publish results, interpretations, and conclusions of
their studies. Awardees are responsible for identifying specific
milestones and quantitative success criteria through the completion of Phase
Awardees will retain custody of and have primary rights to the data and software developed under these awards, subject to Government rights of access consistent with current HHS, PHS, and NIH policies.
NIH staff have substantial programmatic involvement that is above and beyond the normal stewardship role in awards, as described below:
An NIBIB Project Scientist will have substantial scientific-programmatic involvement during conduct of this activity, through technical assistance, advice and coordination above and beyond the normal program stewardship role in awards, as described below.
The NIBIB Project Scientist will be responsible for technical monitoring of the project, which includes approval of changes in experimental approaches, objectives, milestones and timelines; assessing the progress against specified milestones and stated project timelines, as well as for recommending if further funds should be released to the project. However, the role of the NIBIB Project Scientist will be to facilitate and not to direct the activities. It is anticipated that decisions in all activities will be reached by consensus between the PD(s)/PI(s) and the NIBIB Project Scientist, and that NIBIB staff will be given the opportunity to offer input into this process. The NIBIB Project Scientist may provide assistance by accessing NIBIB-supported resources and services.
Additionally, an agency program official or IC program director will be responsible for the normal scientific and programmatic stewardship of the award and will be named in the award notice.
of Joint Responsibility include:
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 arbitration. An Arbitration Panel composed of three members will be convened. It will have three members: a designee of the award recipient(s) 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 arbitration procedure in no way affects the awardee's right to appeal an adverse action that is otherwise appealable in accordance with PHS regulations 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D and HHS regulations 45 CFR Part 16.
When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the Non-Competing Continuation Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
A final progress report, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Transparency Act), includes a requirement for awardees of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards issued in FY2011 or later. All awardees of applicable NIH grants and cooperative agreements are required to report to the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at www.fsrs.gov on all subawards over $25,000. See the NIH Grants Policy Statement for additional information on this reporting requirement.
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
GrantsInfo (Questions regarding application instructions and
process, finding NIH grant resources)
eRA Commons Help Desk (Questions regarding eRA Commons
registration, tracking application status, post submission issues)
Phone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free)
National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
Steven Krosnick, M.D.
National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
David T. George, Ph.D.
Director, Office of Scientific Review
National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
Grants Management Specialist
National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92.
Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices
Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health®
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.