FAMILY AND CHILD WELL-BEING RESEARCH NETWORK Release Date: April 1, 1998 RFA: HD-98-009 P.T. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Application Receipt Date: July 9, 1998 PURPOSE The Demographic and Behavioral Sciences Branch (DBSB) of the Center for Population Research at the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) announces the availability of a Request For Applications that invites applications for cooperative agreements to continue and expand the NICHD Family and Child Well-being Research Network investigating the relationship of family factors to child welfare. The research network will continue to analyze existing data examining the relationship of family factors to child well-being and cooperate in pursuing multi-disciplinary data analysis that has public policy utility. In addition, the network may cooperate to collect data if resources are made available to it from sources outside of the network. HEALTHY PEOPLE 2000 The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving the health promotion and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2000," a PHS-led national activity for setting priority areas. This RFA, Family and Child Well-being Research Network, is related to the priority areas of family planning, educational and community-based programs, and maternal and infant health. Potential applicants may obtain a copy of "Healthy People 2000" (Full Report: Stock No. 017-001-00474-0 or Summary Report: Stock No. 017-001-00473-1) through the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402-9325 (telephone 202-512-1800). ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS Applications may be submitted by domestic for-profit and non-profit organizations, public and private, such as universities, colleges, hospitals, laboratories, units of State or local governments, and eligible agencies of the Federal government. Applications from minority individuals, persons with disabilities and women are encouraged. MECHANISM OF SUPPORT The funding mechanism to be used to support the research network will be the NIH cooperative agreement (U01). Cooperative agreements are assistance mechanisms but differ from research project grants in that there is substantial programmatic involvement of the NICHD Project Coordinator above and beyond the levels required for traditional program management of grants. Specifically, the Project Coordinator will assist the Principal Investigators in the research network. All parties agree to accept the participatory and cooperative nature of the group process (see Terms and Conditions below). Some proportion of the cooperative research funds may be used to support logistic, administrative and policy outreach activities. This RFA is intended as recompetition of a network that was first funded in 1993. The total project period for the research network is five years and an application submitted in response to this RFA may not exceed five years of requested support. Applicants who are currently supported in the NICHD Family and Child Well-being Research Network may apply for competing continuations of the current U01 cooperative agreements. Applicants who are not current members of the network may apply for new U01 cooperative agreements. The anticipated award date is April 1, 1999. FUNDS AVAILABLE It is anticipated that up to nine awards will be made. $1,350,000 for direct costs have been set aside to support the network in the first year and this amount will increase by the standard NIH inflation allowance in subsequent years of the network. The actual level of support is dependent on the receipt of a sufficient number of applications of high scientific merit. Individual applicants may apply for up to $75,000 per year of direct cost to support their individual research programs. In addition, $675,000 per year of direct cost support will be allocated to support the cooperative research plan, to be distributed according to the needs of the overall cooperative research plan across the participating members of the network. It is anticipated that several elements of the current cooperative research program will be continued in the network. These are described in the RESEARCH OBJECTIVES section below. Current grantees will not be given any preference over new applicants in the competition. Although this program is provided for in the financial plan of the NIH, the award of grants pursuant to this RFA is also contingent on the availability of funds for this purpose. The number of awards or funding for co-operative research may increase if programs outside of DBSB, NICHD wish to augment the network. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES Background In 1993, NICHD created the Family and Child Well-being Research Network by supporting seven cooperative agreements for five years. The network was formed to address the frustration within public policy circles that basic information relating to family and child well-being was filled with gaps and analyzed in an uneven manner and within the research community that family and child research was spread among a large number of disciplines so diverse in their research approaches that communication across fields was difficult. The network was conceptualized as a systematic effort to both understand the relationship of family and child well-being from a multi-disciplinary point of view and address public policy concerns in a comprehensive and responsive manner. The network was designed to support secondary data analysis and such activities necessary to make research accessible for public policy purposes. It engaged in research with the Federal Interagency Forum for Child and Family Statistics and its component agencies to improve and balance the information base about families and children. In the process, it helped create a series of indicators about child and family well-being which have been designated by Presidential Executive Order to be an official yardstick of child well-being. It sponsored a number of papers and conferences that supported the federal fatherhood initiative which, in turn, has greatly improved the information base regarding the family behavior of men. A by-product of the research program on fathers has been the planned or actual enhancement of several important data sets with respect to male behavior. These data sets are: the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID), the Early Head Start Evaluation (EHS), the National Longitudinal Survey 1997 Cohort (NLSY97), the Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey, Birth Cohort (ECLS-B), and the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG). The network has also engaged in a multi-faceted research program on the interaction of poverty and child well-being. In the process, the network has been involved in the development of the Survey of Population Dynamics (SPD), the Twelve State Welfare Reform project and the National Child Welfare Study. In all of these cases, the process of secondary data analysis has led to research, conferences, workshops and consultation which, in turn, has enabled others to field and/or plan new data collection that the network (and anyone else) can analyze in the future. More information on these activities can be obtained from the program contact. Continuing Activities The network will continue to function in the public policy niche that it has established for itself. Specifically, it will continue to be an interface to the research world for the Federal Interagency Forum for Child and Family Statistics and be prepared to work with the Forum on an evolving agenda of research topics designed to improve our information base about families and children. Also, the network has undertaken a number of projects in regard to welfare reform that must continue until they are concluded sometime in the next century. Specifically, the network will continue its work on the development and analysis of the SPD with the Census Bureau, the Twelve State Project with ACF and related coordination workshops held to support the DHHS Welfare to Work Initiative. All applicants should address how they might contribute to these activities as part of the cooperative research plan section of their applications. Members of the network will not be required to participate in these activities but the network will be configured so that activities with respect to these commitments will continue. Objectives In addition to the continuing research objectives mentioned above, applicants are invited to address the concerns discussed below. Applicants should propose both a plan for individual research activities and for cooperative activities once the new network is formed. Each investigator in the network will be expected to have demonstrated expertise and access to at least one data set relevant to the topic. Also, applicants must demonstrate that they have both the substantive and statistical expertise to function as part of an interdisciplinary research network. Each investigator will be given support to pursue his or her individual research agenda but a large part of the available resources will be held in reserve to address cooperative research questions agreed upon by the network. The major objective of the network will continue to be secondary data analysis of the relationship of family factors to child well-being in the context of neighborhood, community, societal and public policy influences. The network will be expected to work cooperatively to field a systematic, multi-disciplinary set of analyses on various dimensions of these themes which will be composed of the sum of individual and cooperative work of the network. It is important to describe fully these interconnections and to formulate and test models of the causes and consequences of these relationships. It is also important to elucidate the mechanisms of action by which family factors affect child well-being so that possible avenues of social intervention can be ascertained or existing interventions, such as welfare reform, can be evaluated. The American family has undergone considerable change in modern times. These changes are associated with changes in the way children are raised and with changes in familial support structures that sustain children and develop them into productive adults. It is the intent of this RFA to assist in measuring both family factors and child well-being very broadly so as to develop as comprehensive a picture as possible about the relationship between these considerations. It is also important to understand how family factors and socio-economic conditions combine to influence the nurture of children and help children develop into productive adults from both an individual and societal perspective. It is important to understand how the intergenerational structure of the family marshals resources to care for dependent children and how intergenerational family processes relate to public intervention to sustain and develop children. There are several new substantive issues that merit attention. Evidence points to a fundamental interconnectedness among family structure, fertility and child well-being and DBSB has adopted a goal of fostering research on "parenting and partnering," which signifies the search for an integrated explanation of the behavioral and social processes that influence fertility, family structure and child well-being. Interested parties should request the report, Goals and Opportunities: DBSB Report on Program Planning 1997-2001, March, 1997. There is also a pressing need to better integrate health research into studies of family and child well-being. Traditionally research on the health and socio-economic well-being of families and children has tended to be isolated from each other. However, the evolution of public policy has created a real need to treat both health and socio-economic aspects of family and child well-being simultaneously, especially in regard to childhood disability and the expansion of MEDICAID to cover increasing numbers of poor children. A rapidly growing body of evidence points to the early years of life as a critically important period in a child's life, in which intervention programs involving families with young children can be very effective. It is important to map the behavioral and socio-economic context that shapes the development of young children and to understand how family decision making and public policy effects this context. The research network is expected to concentrate its activity on secondary data analysis. This will enable the research community to exploit fully many of the sources of data that have been specially created for the research community by NICHD and other agencies. In addition, there are many data resources of sub-national populations that should be fully analyzed. It is the intent of this RFA to utilize data containing a fair representation of women and minorities. In exceptional circumstances data confined to specialized populations may be used to enhance our understanding of selected dimensions of the research problem. Investigators may be actively involved in data collection supported outside of the network and may apply for support to collect data during the time of their participation in the network. In such cases, investigators will not be bound by any requirements with respect to data collection, other than those required by the sponsoring agency. If funds are made available to the network to field a particular data collection, then the requirements regarding data collection discussed in the Special Requirements section below will apply. The network will be assembled to achieve the broadest possible coverage in terms of research perspective, analytical technique and sources of data. The focus of the network is the United States, but the use of foreign data may be justified if they provides an insight into the American condition. Investigators must demonstrate that they have a long-term research agenda that is addressing important questions relevant to the research goals of this RFA. In addition they must describe the sources of data to which they have access and plan to use in their research plan. It is important to describe the extent to which the investigator has experience using these data. It is also important to outline the analytic plan and to describe the statistical techniques that will be employed in each phase of the research plan. Individual Research Plan The Principal Investigator should propose an individual research plan to accomplish his or her personal research agenda featuring the secondary analysis of data to which the investigator has access. The plan should have the same degree of specificity and should follow the same format as a regular research grant application. The investigator may request support for any type of research activity commonly available through research assistance mechanisms offered by the NICHD except the cost of collecting new data. Cooperative Research Plan The Principal Investigator should also propose a cooperative research plan that will describe the proposed cooperative research effort that transcends his/her individual research programs. The cooperative research plan should propose questions of substantive and/or public policy significance that should be examined cooperatively. Applicants should indicate how their disciplinary and methodological perspectives could contribute to a cooperative research effort. Also, investigators should indicate which sources of data, with which they have familiarity and access, to should be used in the cooperative research plan. Applicants should address how they might cooperate in the continuing business of the network describe above, should propose projects that would expand the research agenda of the network. Applicants may propose methodological analyses that might improve our understanding of what existing data measure or lead to new measure for future data collection efforts that are conducted by others or led by the network. BUDGET Separate detailed budgets should be submitted for both the individual research plan as well as the cooperative research plan. In addition, a composite budget should be submitted. Applicable facilities and administrative costs will be provided. Budgets will be reviewed on the basis of appropriateness for the work proposed. Allowable costs and policies governing the research grant program of the NIH will prevail. In preparing the budget section of the application, applicants are encouraged to submit a budget plan for the individual research plan that does not exceed $75,000 per year in direct cost and may include a request to attend no more than one scientific meeting per year. We expect that the budget for the cooperative research plan will be in the range of $75,000 to $150,000 depending on the scope of the work proposed. The cooperative research plan should request funds to support the Principal Investigator and any other essential personnel to attend four, two day meetings in Washington, DC per year. Investigators should identify research topics and data analyses that they would be willing and able to perform. Once the network is formed, the steering committee of the network will establish a co-operative research agenda which will be derived from the collective plans offered by successful applicants in the network. Applicants should propose co-operative research for as long as they request individual support (typically five years ) and may budget for the participation of a wide range of colleagues to assist them in pursuing these research topics. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS Terms and Conditions Awardee Responsibilities Each Principal Investigator will have primary responsibility to define objectives and approaches, and to plan, conduct, analyze, and publish results, interpretations and conclusions of his/her studies. Awardees will retain custody of, and primary rights to, their data developed under this award, subject to Government rights of access, consistent with current HHS, PHS, and NIH policies. A budget supporting the individual research programs will be negotiated with NICHD based on the corresponding budget presented in the application. Each investigator will have the right to publish based on the work of their individual research programs. Each Principal Investigator will also propose a cooperative research plan in which they will identify research questions, methodological research, protocols and data sets that they propose to work on cooperatively. The Steering Committee will formulate a research plan for cooperative research which will distill the several individual cooperative research plans into a coherent plan and will involve allocating resources among the participating cooperative agreements to implement it. The cooperative research plan will be agreed upon by majority vote of the Steering Committee, but each Principal Investigator will have the right of approval for any aspect of the cooperative research plan involving them. Due publication credit will be given to all work done cooperatively. Steering Committee Responsibilities Planning and implementation of the cooperative aspects of the study will be done by a Steering Committee consisting of the Principal Investigator from each participating awardee institution and the NICHD Project Coordinator. The Steering Committee will: o Plan the design and implementation of the cooperative research protocols o Participate in decision-making regarding allocation of funds for cooperative research protocols. o Publish results, conclusions and interpretations of the cooperative protocols. o Formulate publication policy and appoint a Publication Subcommittee, as judged necessary by the Steering Committee. o Agree to accept the coordinating role of the committee and the cooperative nature of the group process. NICHD Responsibilities The NICHD Project Coordinator will be the Family Demography Coordinator of the Demographic and Behavioral Sciences Branch, NICHD. The Project Coordinator is a partner within the network representing the government's interest in the substantive work of the network. The primary role of the Project Coordinator is to facilitate the work of the network and to connect the network to public policy operations within the government. He will: o Assist in all functions of the Steering Committee o Assist with the development of common protocols o Assist the steering committee in reviewing and commenting on each stage of the program before subsequent stages are started. o Assist the steering committee in exercising the options of adding, modifying or terminating aspects of the program. o Assist in the analysis, interpretation and reporting of findings in the scientific literature and other media to the community at large and the public policy community within the federal government. Project Officer NICHD will appoint a Project Officer who is not the Project Coordinator who will: o Have the option to withhold support to a participating institution, if technical performance requirements such as compliance with the protocol are not met. o Carry out continuous review of all activities to ensure objectives are being met. The above responsibilities are in addition to, not in lieu of, the levels of involvement normally required for program stewardship of grants. Arbitration Procedures When agreement between an awardee and NICHD staff cannot be reached on programmatic and scientific-technical issues that may arise after the award, an arbitration panel will be formed. The panel will consist of one person selected by the Principal Investigators, one person selected by the NICHD staff, and a third person selected by these two members. The decision of the arbitration panel, by majority vote will be binding. These special arbitration procedures in no way affect the awardee's right to appeal an adverse action in accordance with PHS regulations at 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D, and HHS regulations at 45 CFR Part 16. Cooperative Agreements are assistance mechanisms and are subject to the same administrative requirements as grants. The above Terms of Award are in addition to, and not in lieu of, otherwise applicable OMB administrative guidelines, HHS grant administration regulation at 45 CFR Part 74, and other HHS, PHS, and NIH grant administration policies and procedures. Meetings Each investigator should budget for four (4) meetings a year in the Washington, DC area. Each meeting will be approximately two days in length. During these meetings, the steering commit- tee will decide upon the operating policies of the network, discuss on-going research, formulate the collaborative research plan, and discuss the implications of their research with interested parties outside of the network who may be invited by the steering committee as the occasion warrants. These meetings will be coordinated by the Project Coordinator. Communications There will be a much greater level of communication among network members than is normal for individual research project grants. Individual Investigators should budget appropriately for greater telephone usage, more copies of research papers, and greater mailing costs than in a regular research grant. The use of the Internet will be a central feature of the network. Expectation of Cooperation There will be high expectations of the members of the research network to interact with other members of the network, share research insights, cooperate in the design and implementation of a cooperative research plan, be responsive to needs of the cooperative work of the network, and sensitive to the public policy significance of its activities. Applicants should indicate their willingness and ability to participate in these stated aspects of the network. The statement of willingness to cooperate should be included under Consortium/Collaborators, section C-8 of the Research Plan in the application. Advisory Committee NICHD will appoint an advisory panel to assist the Steering Committee in carrying out the goals of this network. The advisory panel will be appointed by NICHD and be comprised of senior scientists in the areas central to the work of the network who are not affiliated with NICHD or part of the network. As well as serving in an advisory capacity to the Steering Committee as deemed necessary, the advisory panel will serve in a review capacity whenever a project is approved by the steering committee which falls outside of research reviewed and approved as part of the research scope of the network. The network's scope is defined as the sum of the approved individual and cooperative research plans of participating cooperative agreements in the network. In cases when the network wishes to pursue a project outside of its approved research scope or when another agency wishes the network to undertake a project outside of the approved research scope of the network, the advisory panel will review that project. Also the advisory board will review the content and design of any proposed data collection project as well as serve as the data safety and monitoring committee. INCLUSION OF WOMEN AND MINORITIES IN RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS It is the policy of the NIH that women and members of minority groups and their subpopulations must be included in all NIH-supported biomedical and behavioral research projects involving human subjects, unless a clear and compelling rationale and justification are provided that inclusion is inappropriate with respect to health of the subjects or the purpose of the research. This policy results from the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 (Section 492B of Public Law 103-43). All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the NIH guidelines for Inclusion of Women and Minorities in Clinical Research, which have been published in the federal register of March 28, 1994 (FR 59 14508-14513) and in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, Volume 23, Number 11, b March 18, 1994. Investigators may obtain copies of the policy from the program staff listed under INQUIRIES. Program staff also can provide additional relevant information concerning the policy. APPLICATION PROCEDURES Grant application form PHS-398 (rev. 9/95) is to be used to apply for these grants. The PHS-398 is available from most institutional offices of sponsored research and can also be obtained from the Division of Extramural Outreach and Information Resources, 6701 Rockledge Drive, MSC 7910, Bethesda, MD 20892 (telephone: 301-710-0267; Email: asknih@od.nih.gov). The research plan section of the application should conform to the guidelines of PHS-398. The individual research plan should be presented first and should follow steps 1-4, i.e., Specific Aims, Background and Significance, Progress Report/Preliminary Studies, and Research Design and Methods, of the standard research plan section. The budget for the application should be predicated on the requirements of the individual research plan and on the cooperative research plan that the investigator is proposing to work on cooperatively. Since these applications will in fact be proposing two research plans, the individual and the collaborative, the standard 25-page limitation will not apply. However, applicants may not exceed 40 pages. The RFA label available in the 9/91 version of PHS form 398 must be affixed to the bottom of the face page. Failure to use this label could result in delayed processing of the application such that it may not reach the review committee in time for the review. In addition, the RFA Title and number must be typed on line 2 of the face page of the application form and the YES box must be marked. Submit a signed, typewritten original of the application, including the checklist, and three signed photocopies, in one package to: CENTER FOR SCIENTIFIC REVIEW NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH 6701 ROCKLEDGE DRIVE, ROOM 1040, MSC 7710 BETHESDA, MD 20892-7710 BETHESDA, MD 20817 (for express/courier service) At the time of submission, two additional copies of the application must also be sent to: Susan Streufert, Ph.D. Division of Scientific Review National Institute of Child Health and Human Development 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5E03F, MSC 7510 Bethesda, MD 20892-7510 Bethesda, MD 20854 (for express/courier service) Applications must be received by July 9, 1998. If an application is received after that date, it will be returned to the applicant without review. The Center for Scientific Review (CSR) will not accept any application in response to this RFA that is essentially the same as one currently pending in initial review, unless the applicant withdraws the pending application. CSR will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one already reviewed. This does not preclude the submission of substantial revisions of applications already reviewed, but such applications must include an introduction addressing the previous critique. REVIEW CONSIDERATIONS Upon receipt, applications will be reviewed for completeness by CSR and for responsiveness by NICHD. Incomplete or non-responsive applications will be returned to the applicant without further consideration. Those applications that are complete and responsive will be evaluated for scientific/technical merit by an appropriate peer review group, convened by the NICHD in accordance with the review criteria stated below. The second level of review will be provided by the National Advisory Child Health and Human Development Council. As part of the initial merit review, a process may be used by the initial review group in which applications will be determined to be competitive or non-competitive based on their scientific merit relative to other applications received in response to this RFA. Applications judged to be competitive will be discussed further and assigned a priority score. Applications determined to be non-competitive will be withdrawn from further consideration and the Principal Investigator will receive a summary statement of reviewers comments. Review Criteria The goals of NIH-supported research are to advance our understanding of biological systems, improve the control of disease, and enhance health. In the written review, comments on the following aspects of the application will be made in order to judge the likelihood that the proposed research will have a substantial impact on the pursuit of these goals. Each of these criteria will be addressed and considered in the assignment of the overall score, which is to reflect the overall impact of the project on the field, weighing the criteria appropriately for each application. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have a major scientific impact and thus deserve a high merit rating. For example, an investigator may propose to carry out important work, that by its nature is not innovative, but is essential to move a field forward. (1) Significance: Does this study address an important problem? If the aims of the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge be advanced? What will be the effect of these studies on the concepts or methods that drive this field? (2) Approach: Are the conceptual framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well-integrated, and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics? (3) Innovation: Does the project employ novel concepts, approaches or methods? Are the aims original and innovative? Does the project challenge existing paradigms or develop new methodologies or technologies? (4) Investigator: Is the investigator appropriately trained and well suited to carry out this work? Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal investigator and other researchers (if any)? (5) Environment: Does the scientific environment in which the work will be done contributes to the probability of success? Do the proposed analyses take advantage of unique features of the scientific environment or employ useful collaborative arrangements? Is there evidence of institutional support? (6) Value to Network: Does the investigator contribute to the multi-disciplinary concept of the research network? Does the cooperative research plan offer ideas which are likely to stimulate important research that has useful public policy implications? In addition to the above criteria, in accordance with NIH policy, all applications will also be reviewed with respect to the following: - The adequacy of plans to include both genders, minorities, and their subgroups as appropriate for the scientific goals of the research. Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects will also be evaluated. - The reasonableness of the proposed budget and duration in relation to the proposed research. - The adequacy of the proposed protection for humans, animals or the environment, to the extent they may be adversely affected by the project proposed in the application. AWARD CRITERIA The anticipated date of award is April 1, 1999. An attempt will be made to balance the network so that it will have a multi-disciplinary composition, a diversity of research issues and broad coverage of extant data sources. Awards will be made on the basis of the scientific merit of the research application as determined by peer review, the need to create a balanced network and the availability of funds. INQUIRIES Written and telephone inquiries concerning this RFA are encouraged. The opportunity to clarify any issues or questions from potential applicants is welcome. Direct inquiries regarding programmatic issues to: V. Jeffery Evans, Ph.D., J.D. Center for Population Research National Institute of Child Health and Human Development 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 8B13 Bethesda, MD 20892-7510 Telephone: (301) 496-1174 FAX: (301) 496-0962 Email: Jeff_Evans@NIH.gov Direct inquiries regarding fiscal matters to: Ms. Melinda Nelson Grants Management Branch National Institute of Child Health and Human Development 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 8A17K Bethesda, MD 20892-7510 Telephone: (301) 496-5481 FAX: (301) 402-0915 Email: nelsonm@exchange.nih.gov AUTHORITY AND REGULATIONS This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 93.864 (Population Research). Awards are made under authorization of the Public Health Service Act, Title IV, Part A (Public Law 78-410, as amended by Public Law 99-158, 42 USC 241 and 285) and administered under PHS grant policies and Federal Regulations, 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Part 74. This program is not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372, or to Health Systems Agency Review. The PHS strongly encourages all grant and contract recipients to provide a smoke-free workplace and promote the non-use of all tobacco products. In addition, Public Law 103-227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking in certain facilities (or in some cases, any portion of a facility) in which regular or routine education, library, day care, health care or early childhood development services are provided to children. This is consistent with the PHS mission to protect and advance the physical and mental health of the American people.
Return to NIH Guide Main Index
Office of Extramural Research (OER) |
National Institutes of Health (NIH) 9000 Rockville Pike Bethesda, Maryland 20892 |
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) |
||||||||
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files. |