Department of Health and Human Services

Part 1. Overview Information

Participating Organization(s)

National Institutes of Health (NIH)

Components of Participating Organizations

National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)

Note: Not all NIH Institutes, Centers, and Offices (ICOs) participate in Announcements. Applicants should carefully note which ICOs participate in this announcement and view their respective areas of research interest at the ICO-Specific Scientific Interests website. ICOs that do not participate in this announcement will not consider applications for funding.

Funding Opportunity Title
NIDCR Prospective Observational or Biomarker Validation Study Cooperative Agreement (U01 Clinical Trial Not Allowed)
Activity Code

U01 Research Project – Cooperative Agreements

Announcement Type
Reissue of PAR-25-239
Related Notices
Funding Opportunity Number (FON)
PAR-27-058
Companion Funding Opportunity
None
Number of Applications

See Part 2, Section III. 3. Additional Information on Eligibility.

Assistance Listing Number(s)
93.121
Funding Opportunity Purpose

This Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) will support, through the cooperative agreement mechanism, investigator-initiated observational studies or biomarker validation studies that require prospective collection of data/biospecimens or continued analysis of data/biospecimens.

Funding Opportunity Goal(s)

NIDCR extramural research provides research funds to support basic, translational, and clinical research in dental, oral, and craniofacial health and disease through grants, cooperative agreements, including small business research through the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs and contracts that support scientists working in institutions throughout the United States and internationally.

Key Dates

Posted Date
June 16, 2026
Open Date (Earliest Submission Date)
September 05, 2026
The following table includes NIH standard due dates marked with an asterisk.
Application Due Dates Review and Award Cycles
New Renewal / Resubmission / Revision (as allowed) AIDS - New/Renewal/Resubmission/Revision, as allowed Scientific Merit Review Advisory Council Review Earliest Start Date
October 05, 2026 * November 05, 2026 * Not Applicable March 2027 May 2027 July 2027
February 05, 2027 * March 05, 2027 * Not Applicable July 2027 October 2027 December 2027
June 05, 2027 * July 05, 2027 * Not Applicable November 2027 January 2028 April 2028
October 05, 2027 * November 05, 2027 * Not Applicable March 2028 May 2028 July 2028
February 05, 2028 * March 05, 2028 * Not Applicable July 2028 October 2028 December 2028
June 05, 2028 * July 05, 2028 * Not Applicable November 2028 January 2029 April 2029
October 05, 2028 * November 05, 2028 * Not Applicable March 2029 May 2029 July 2029
February 05, 2029 * March 05, 2029 * Not Applicable July 2029 October 2029 December 2029
June 05, 2029 * July 05, 2029 * Not Applicable November 2029 January 2030 April 2030

All applications are due by 5:00 PM local time of applicant organization. 

Applicants are encouraged to apply early to allow adequate time to make any corrections to errors found in the application during the submission process by the due date.

Due Dates for E.O. 12372

Not Applicable

Expiration Date
July 06, 2029
Required Application Instructions

It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide, except where instructed to do otherwise (in this NOFO or in a Notice from NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts).

Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the NOFO) 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.

There are several options available to submit your application through Grants.gov to NIH and Department of Health and Human Services partners. You must use one of these submission options to access the application forms for this opportunity.

  1. Use the NIH ASSIST system to prepare, submit and track your application online.
  2. Use an institutional system-to-system (S2S) solution to prepare and submit your application to Grants.gov and eRA Commons to track your application. Check with your institutional officials regarding availability.
  3. Use Grants.gov Workspace to prepare and submit your application and eRA Commons to track your application.

Part 2. Full Text of Announcement

Section I. Notice of Funding Opportunity Description

 Purpose

This Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) will support, through the cooperative agreement mechanism, investigator-initiated observational studies or biomarker validation studies that require prospective collection of data/biospecimens or continued analysis of data/biospecimens collected previously.

Background and Scope

The National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR) is committed to identifying effective preventive, diagnostic and treatment approaches for dental, oral and craniofacial diseases and disorders. The design and execution of clinical studies that are not only scientifically rigorous and adequately powered, but also replicable and reproducible is a high priority for NIDCR.

Clinical studies involving the prospective collection of data and/or biospecimens can generate robust data and expand the knowledge base to improve dental, oral, and craniofacial (DOC) health and related health outcomes. Longitudinal studies allow for prospective assessment of risk factors (exposures) and their relation to disease development. Also, disease and standard-of-care treatment outcomes can be systematically observed and measured.

This NOFO supports the use of appropriate study designs to answer research questions, rigor in exposure and outcome assessment, demonstration that an appropriate study population can be enrolled quickly and be retained, use of appropriate methodologies for biospecimen collection, storage and analysis, and collaborations with experts in the design, implementation, and analysis of large observational studies, such as experienced statisticians and data managers.

For applications proposing prospective collection of data and/or biospecimens, we strongly encourage that the investigative team include a data coordinating center. Investigators are strongly encouraged to consult with NIDCR Scientific/Research staff to discuss their proposed studies prior to submission.

Prospective observational studies: Examples of resource intensive study designs considered appropriate to this NOFO are observational population-based or multi-site clinic studies, cohort studies prospectively ascertaining risk and protective factors for disease onset or progression, non-interventional comparative safety and effectiveness studies, clinical studies with primary data and/or biospecimen collection in medically vulnerable or medically complex populations, and clinical or population-based cross-sectional, case-control or cohort studies integrating clinical, omics, imaging, economic, environmental or other data sources. Research studies may be proposed for long-term follow-up of clinical trial participants after a preventive or therapeutic intervention, and the initial trial has ended. An additional follow-up could be used to assess long-term adverse events, sustained effects of the intervention, or to collect additional data that could potentially create combined cohorts to uncover new knowledge.

Biomarker validation studies: This NOFO also promotes advanced analytic and/or clinical validation of strong candidate biomarkers and endpoints for preventive, diagnostic or prognostic utility, to demonstrate that changes in the biomarker or endpoint are reliably and accurately linked to pathophysiology, clinical outcomes, therapeutic target engagement or treatment response.

A biomarker analytic and/or clinical validation study is designed to validate a strong candidate biomarker measure(s) or endpoint(s), supported by robust preliminary data, for its utility in diagnosis, prognosis, monitoring, and/or predicting treatment response. Rigorous analyses require large numbers of study participants from whom biospecimens are collected in a standardized manner. Biospecimen analyses can include epi/genomic, epi/transcriptomic, protein, cellular, metabolomic, imaging, and physiologic endpoints.

The initial discovery of the biomarker or assay is expected to have been previously completed using a pre-existing set of human biospecimens from individuals with the same disease or condition as proposed for validation. Specifically, it is assumed that a candidate biomarker has already been identified, and assay technology or detection methods have been developed.

This NOFO will support analytic validation studies that evaluate the reliability, precision and accuracy of methods testing the association between a biomarker or endpoint and disease pathophysiology, clinical outcome, target engagement or treatment response; and demonstrate test reproducibility and harmonization of assays or equipment across testing sites. This NOFO will also support clinical validation studies that validate the proposed biomarkers in a new, independent cohort to: estimate the prevalence of the marker in patients for the intended clinical use; establish that the biomarker or endpoint reliably identifies, measures, or predicts response for the disease or condition of interest; and establish an appropriate cut-off or threshold for the biomarker assay within the intended clinical context.

Validation studies that include as secondary aims improvement in the reliability, precision and accuracy of an established biomarker or endpoint by integrating it with additional measures are acceptable.

Examples of prospective or validation studies that might be supported by this NOFO include, but are not limited to:

  • Multi-center observational cohort studies assessing preventive and risk factors for development or progression of dental, oral or craniofacial diseases (for example, head and neck cancer, orofacial pain conditions, oral manifestations of systemic conditions, or long-term sequelae of dental treatments);
  • Observational cohort studies assessing treatment outcomes for oral diseases or conditions (for example, head and neck cancer, periodontal disease, dental caries, Sjögren's disease, craniofacial anomalies, DOC pain conditions);
  • Research examining oral health outcomes in medically complex patients, such as those with oral sequelae of systemic treatments or conditions;
  • Research characterizing the natural history and persistence of oral infections;
  • Research evaluating the effectiveness of standard-of-care periodontal therapy in individuals with type 1 or type 2 diabetes and identifying factors that predict treatment response;
  • Observational cohort or cross-sectional studies aimed at developing or establishing algorithms to tailor or target behavioral or social interventions for individuals, groups, communities, or settings where further assessment is justified;
  • Developing predictive tools for optimizing disease prevention, detection and treatment;
  • Research leveraging existing biospecimens, data and/or epidemiologic cohorts;
  • Cross-sectional, case-control or cohort studies collecting and analyzing biospecimens through -omics to assess mechanisms or treatment responses to dental, oral, and/or craniofacial diseases including head and neck cancer, craniosynostosis and orofacial clefting;
  • Cohort studies assessing associations between psychosocial and behavioral factors and -omics changes (including epigenetic modifications to the human genome and/or oral microbiome alterations) and evaluating the impact of these associations on oral diseases and conditions;
  • Cohort studies analyzing interactions between the human genome and oral microbiome in response to environmental stimuli, and their impact on oral diseases and conditions;
  • Studies applying analytic validation using biospecimens appropriate for the clinical context, establishing analytic metrics, and harmonizing assays for the biomarker(s) of interest;
  • Clinical validation of biomarker(s) through prospective collection, aiming to establish robust links between the biomarker and dental, oral or craniofacial disease detection or therapeutic response.

The proposed clinical study must meet all applicable NIH and Office of Human Research Protections (OHRP) policy requirements. Recipients are required to comply with NIDCR Clinical Terms of Award. After NIDCR approval of the final clinical research protocol and associated documents, clinical sites will complete study staff training and other site initiation activities prior to study subject recruitment. The materials contained in the U01 application should be sufficient to demonstrate readiness to complete site initiation requirements in a timely manner, once the study documents are approved.

Applications not responsive to this NOFO

The following types of research projects are not responsive to this NOFO. Applications proposing such projects will be considered non-responsive, will be withdrawn from review, and not considered for funding.

  • Biomarker and endpoint Discovery Phase, which may include initial identification, development of detection technology, and preliminary validation studies.
  • Studies that meet the NIH Definition of a Clinical Trial (a decision tool is available on the NIH website). Investigators proposing clinical trials must use NIDCR NOFOs soliciting applications for clinical trials.
  • Investigators considering smaller prospective observational studies should consider submitting a NIH Research Project Grant (Parent R01 Clinical Trial Not Allowed) application or an application in response to other appropriate NOFOs. 

See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.

Section II. Award Information

Funding Instrument

Cooperative Agreement: A financial assistance mechanism used when there will be substantial Federal scientific or programmatic involvement. Substantial involvement means that, after award, NIH scientific or program staff will assist, guide, coordinate, or participate in project activities. See Section VI.2 for additional information about the substantial involvement for this NOFO.

Application Types Allowed
New
Renewal
Resubmission

The OER Glossary and the How to Apply Application Guide provide details on these application types. Only those application types listed here are allowed for this NOFO.

Clinical Trial?

Not Allowed: This NOFO only accepts applications that do not propose clinical trials. Note: Applications may propose activities involving human subjects that are not deemed clinical trials.

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.

Award Budget

Up to $500,000 in direct costs per year.

Award Project Period

A project duration of up to five years may be requested. 

NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made from this NOFO.

Section III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants

Eligible Organizations

Higher Education Institutions - Includes all types

  • Public/State Controlled Institutions of Higher Education
  • Private Institutions of Higher Education

Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education

  • Nonprofits with 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)
  • Nonprofits without 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)

For-Profit Organizations

  • Small Businesses
  • For-Profit Organizations (Other than Small Businesses)

Local Governments

  • State Governments
  • County Governments
  • City or Township Governments
  • Special District Governments
  • Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Federally Recognized)
  • Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Other than Federally Recognized).

Federal Governments

  • Eligible Agencies of the Federal Government
  • U.S. Territory or Possession

Other

  • Independent School Districts
  • Public Housing Authorities/Indian Housing Authorities
  • Native American Tribal Organizations (other than Federally recognized tribal governments)
  • Faith-based or Community-based Organizations
  • Regional Organizations

Foreign Organizations/International Collaborations

Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Organizations) are not eligible to apply.

Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.

Foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, are not allowed.

Required Registrations

Applicant Organizations

Applicant organizations must complete and maintain the following registrations as described in the How to Apply- Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. All registrations must be completed prior to the application being submitted. Registration can take 6 weeks or more, so applicants should begin the registration process as soon as possible. Failure to complete registrations in advance of a due date is not a valid reason for a late submission, please reference the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications for additional information.

  • System for Award Management (SAM) – Applicants must complete and maintain an active registration, which requires renewal at least annually. The renewal process may require as much time as the initial registration. SAM registration includes the assignment of a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code for domestic organizations which have not already been assigned a CAGE Code. Foreign organizations must obtain a NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code (in lieu of a CAGE code) in order to register in SAM.
    • Unique Entity Identifier (UEI)- A UEI is issued as part of the SAM.gov registration process. The same UEI must be used for all registrations, as well as on the grant application.
  • eRA Commons - Once the unique organization identifier is established, organizations can register with eRA Commons in tandem with completing their Grants.gov registrations; all registrations must be in place by time of submission. eRA Commons requires organizations to identify at least one Signing Official (SO) and at least one Program Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) account in order to submit an application.
  • Grants.gov – Applicants must have an active SAM registration in order to complete the Grants.gov registration.

Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD(s)/PI(s))

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

All PD(s)/PI(s) must be registered with ORCID. The personal profile associated with the PD(s)/PI(s) eRA Commons account must be linked to a valid ORCID ID. For more information on linking an ORCID ID to an eRA Commons personal profile see the ORCID topic in our eRA Commons online help.

Eligible Individuals (Program Director/Principal Investigator)

Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with their organization to develop an application for support.

For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the How to Apply-Application Guide.

2. Cost Sharing

This NOFO does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 1.2 Definition of Terms.

3. Additional Information on Eligibility

Number of Applications

Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct.

The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time, per NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.7.4 Submission of Resubmission Application. This means that the NIH will not accept:

  • A new (A0) application that is submitted before issuance of the summary statement from the review of an overlapping new (A0) or resubmission (A1) application.
  • A resubmission (A1) application that is submitted before issuance of the summary statement from the review of the previous new (A0) application.
  • An application that has substantial overlap with another application pending appeal of initial peer review (see NIH Grants Policy Statement 2.3.9.4 Similar, Essentially Identical, or Identical Applications).

Section IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Requesting an Application Package

The application forms package specific to this opportunity must be accessed through ASSIST, Grants.gov Workspace or an institutional system-to-system solution. Links to apply using ASSIST or Grants.gov Workspace are available in Part 1 of this NOFO. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution.

2. Content and Form of Application Submission

It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the Research (R) Instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide except where instructed in this notice of funding opportunity to do otherwise (in this NOFO, in a policy notice, or other notice from NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts). 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.

Page Limitations

All page limitations described in the How to Apply- Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.

Instructions for Application Submission

The following section supplements the instructions found in the How to Apply- Application Guide and should be used for preparing an application to this NOFO.

SF424(R&R) Cover

All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.

SF424(R&R) Project/Performance Site Locations

All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.

SF424(R&R) Other Project Information

All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.

Other Attachments: The information provided here will be considered by reviewers and is meant to supplement, not duplicate, information provided in the Research Plan or the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form. The application must contain a Quality Management Plan and Clinical Data Management Plan, according to the instructions below.

1. Quality Management Plan (limit 3 pages). The purpose of the Quality Management Plan is to establish standard processes for all study-related activities, to assess and document adherence to all clinical study procedures, and to ensure the quality of data collection procedures.

  • Describe plans to standardize study processes, train study staff, and monitor adherence to the clinical protocol.
  • Describe the methods and systems for data collection (e.g., Case Report Forms/CRFs), including timely data entry, and review to ensure accurate and consistent data collection.

2. Clinical Data Management Plan (limit 2 pages). The purpose of the Clinical Data Management Plan is to establish validated systems and controls to ensure the integrity of the clinical research data being collected for the proposed study.

  • Describe the methods and systems for data verification and data validation. Describe the frequency of data verification, data query process, and any planned mitigation strategies in the event of data system noncompliance.
  • Describe methods and systems to ensure data confidentiality and subject privacy.

If the proposed study involves prospective data collection, the application must also contain a Schedule of Events, according to the instructions below.

3. Schedule of Events (limit 2 pages). The purpose of the Schedule of Events is to demonstrate that the planned activity(ies) are appropriate for the study design and the data to be collected.

  • Provide a schematic, table, or text description of the protocol-specified schedule of events for an individual study participant. It should capture each study visit/assessment time point and planned activity(ies) for each time point.

SF424(R&R) Senior/Key Person Profile

All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.

R&R or Modular Budget

All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.

A detailed budget with budget justifications must be included for the entire study and data analysis period.

If parts of the costs of the study are to be borne by sources other than NIH, these contributions must be presented in detail in the budget justification. These outsource costs do not constitute cost sharing as defined in the current NIH Grants Policy Statement and should not be presented as part of the requested budget.

R&R Subaward Budget

All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.

PHS 398 Cover Page Supplement

All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.

PHS 398 Research Plan

All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:

Research Strategy:

Significance:

The significance and biological relevance of the proposed study must be stated clearly. It should be supported by the following:

  • Provide a clear statement of the question(s) that the study will address and its importance.
  • Describe the scientific rationale and clinical need (if applicable) for the study, including an assessment of previous preclinical and/or clinical studies and their quality.
  • Describe the potential for the study results to impact knowledge, clinical practice or health care policy or systems.
  • For biomarker validation studies, provide supporting data to demonstrate that the candidate biomarker identifies, measures or predicts the disease or condition of interest.
  • For biomarker validation studies, describe the current status of initial analytic validation and preliminary analytic performance of the biomarker(s) in human specimens within the intended clinical context.

Approach:

  • Address the feasibility of recruiting participants who are eligible for the proposed research. For an application proposing a multi-site study, applicants are expected to provide evidence that each recruiting center has access to sufficient study participants who meet the eligibility criteria.
  • Provide a concise snapshot of the planned clinical study. It is expected to:
    • Clearly state the study objectives.
    • Describe and provide rationale for the study design, including study groups and number of sites.
    • Specify the primary and important secondary outcome measures that align with each objective, provide justification for their selection, and describe how they will be collected and the criteria for measuring them.
    • Describe the study population, including the sample size, pertinent demographic information, required health status or disease condition, and geographic location. Explain why the study population is an appropriate group to address the study objectives. Do not duplicate information described in section 2 (Study Population Characteristics) of the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information.
    • Provide a statistical analysis plan, including power calculations, data analysis approaches, and plans for handling missing data.
  • Discuss potential biases or challenges in the proposed study and how they will be minimized and/or addressed.
  • For biomarker analytic validation studies, describe the plans to evaluate performance of the biomarker assay(s) (e.g. accuracy, precision, sensitivity, specificity, reportable range of test results, reference intervals (normal values) with controls and calibrators, reproducibility, and magnitude and reliability of the association between biomarker and outcome).
  • For biomarker clinical validation studies, describe the number of study participants/biospecimens needed to test prevalence of the marker and associate assay results with a pre-specified clinical outcome within the intended clinical context of use and establish the threshold or cut-off for the assay.
  • For studies involving genomic or -omics analyses, provide the plan for biospecimen analysis.

Letters of Support: Letters of support from clinical partners, research collaborators, or other groups the investigators propose to work with should be included.

Resource Sharing Plan: Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans as provided in the How to Apply - Application Guide.

 Other Plan(s): 

All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:

  • A Data Management and Sharing Plan (DMS Plan) is required for any NIH-funded or conducted research that will generate scientific data. Applicants must submit the DMS Plan at the time of application using the NIH DMS Plan Format Page. The DMS Plan must address the elements in the structured format. Where the DMS Plan Format Page requires a "Yes or No" response, no additional narrative is allowed. 
  • The Data Management and Sharing Plan attachment is in addition to, and separate from, the Clinical Data Management Plan attachment.

Appendix: Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the How to Apply - Application Guide.

  • No publications or other material, with the exception of blank questionnaires or blank surveys, may be included in the Appendix.

PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information

When involving human subjects research, clinical research, and/or NIH-defined clinical trials (and when applicable, clinical trials research experience) follow all instructions for the PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form in the How to Apply- Application Guide, with the following additional instructions:

If you answered "Yes" to the question "Are Human Subjects Involved?" on the R&R Other Project Information form, you must include at least one human subjects study record using the Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information form or Delayed Onset Study record.

Study Record: PHS Human Subjects and Clinical Trials Information

All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.

Section 2 - Study Population Characteristics

2.5 Recruitment and Retention Plan

If applicable, describe plans and strategies for participant recruitment/enrollment, including outreach activities and pre-study assessments of the ability of participating sites to recruit the proposed target number of participants. Describe approaches to be used for retention and follow-up of enrolled participants and address any anticipated changes in the composition of the study population over the course of the study.

2.7 Study Timeline

Provide a timeline for implementing and completing the study, including the estimated time to: a) open study to enrollment; b) complete data collection; and c) complete final data analysis.

Section 3 - Protection and Monitoring Plans

3.5 Overall Structure of the Study Team

For studies that include multiple sites and/or a separate data coordinating center or laboratory, describe the organizational structure and communication plans for the study.

Delayed Onset Study

Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately (i.e., delayed start). All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.

PHS Assignment Request Form

All instructions in the How to Apply- Application Guide must be followed.

3. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)

See Part 2. Section III.1 for information regarding the requirement for obtaining a unique entity identifier and for completing and maintaining active registrations in System for Award Management (SAM), NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code (if applicable), eRA Commons, and Grants.gov

4. Submission Dates and Times

Part I. contains information about Key Dates and times. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission. When a submission date falls on a weekend or Federal holiday, the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day.

Organizations must submit applications to Grants.gov (the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies). Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons, NIH's electronic system for grants administration. NIH and Grants.gov systems check the application against many of the application instructions upon submission. Errors must be corrected and a changed/corrected application must be submitted to Grants.gov on or before the application due date and time.  If a Changed/Corrected application is submitted after the deadline, the application will be considered late. Applications that miss the due date and time are subjected to the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications.

Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.

Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in the How to Apply-Application Guide.

5. Intergovernmental Review (E.O. 12372)

This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.

6. Funding Restrictions

All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 7.9.1 Selected Items of Cost.

7. Other Submission Requirements and Information

Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the How to Apply – 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 How to Apply – Application Guide. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Dealing with System Issues guidance. For assistance with application submission, contact the Application Submission Contacts in Section VII.

Important reminders:

All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile form. Failure to register in the Commons and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the successful submission of an electronic application to NIH. See Section III of this NOFO for information on registration requirements.

The applicant organization must ensure that the unique entity identifier provided on the application is the same identifier used in the organization's profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Management. Additional information may be found in the How to Apply – Application Guide.

See more tips for avoiding common errors.

Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with application instructions by the Center for Scientific Review and responsiveness by components of participating organizations, NIH. Applications that are incomplete, non-compliant and/or nonresponsive will not be reviewed. 

Mandatory Disclosure

Recipients or subrecipients must submit any information related to violations of federal criminal law involving fraud, bribery, or gratuity violations potentially affecting the federal award. See Mandatory Disclosures, 2 CFR 200.113 and NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 4.1.35.

Send written disclosures to the NIH Chief Grants Management Officer listed on the Notice of Award for the IC that funded the award and to the HHS Office of Inspector Grant Self Disclosure Program at grantdisclosures@oig.hhs.gov.

Post Submission Materials

Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy

Section V. Application Review Information

1. Criteria

Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. Applications submitted to the NIH in support of the NIH mission are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the NIH peer review system.

Overall Impact

Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following scored review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed). An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have a major scientific impact.

Scored Review Criteria

Reviewers will consider Factors 1, 2 and 3 in the determination of scientific merit, and in providing an overall impact score. In addition, Factors 1 and 2 will each receive a separate factor score. 

 

Significance

  • Evaluate the importance of the proposed research in the context of current scientific challenges and opportunities, either for advancing knowledge within the field, or more broadly. Assess whether the application addresses an important gap in knowledge in the field, would solve a critical problem, or create a valuable conceptual or technical advance.
  • Evaluate the rationale for undertaking the study, the rigor of the scientific background for the work (e.g., prior literature and/or preliminary data) and whether the scientific background justifies the proposed study.

Innovation

  • Evaluate the extent to which innovation influences the importance of undertaking the proposed research. Note that while technical or conceptual innovation can influence the importance of the proposed research, a project that is not applying novel concepts or approaches may be of critical importance for the field.
  • Evaluate whether the proposed work applies novel concepts, methods or technologies or uses existing concepts, methods, technologies in novel ways, to enhance the overall impact of the project.

Specific to this NOFO:

  • Evaluate whether the proposed study has a clear statement of the question(s) that the study will address, its importance and the potential of the study results to improve knowledge, clinical practice or health care policy or systems.
  • For biomarker validation studies, evaluate whether the application provides sufficient evidence of the preliminary analytical performance of the biomarker assay(s) in human specimens within the intended clinical context.

 

Approach

  • Evaluate the scientific quality of the proposed work. Evaluate the likelihood that compelling, reproducible findings will result (rigor) and assess whether the proposed studies can be done well and within the timeframes proposed (feasibility).

Rigor:

  • Evaluate the potential to produce unbiased, reproducible, robust data.
  • Evaluate the rigor of experimental design and whether appropriate controls are in place.
  • Evaluate whether the sample size is sufficient and well-justified.
  • Assess the quality of the plans for analysis, interpretation, and reporting of results.
  • Evaluate whether the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex or age, in the design, analysis, and reporting.
  • For applications involving human subjects or vertebrate animals, also evaluate:
    • the rigor of the intervention or study manipulation (if applicable to the study design).
    • whether outcome variables are justified.
    • whether the results will be generalizable or, in the case of a rare disease/special group, relevant to the particular subgroup.
    • whether the study population appropriately models the target population.
  • For applications involving human subjects, including clinical trials, assess the adequacy of inclusion plans as appropriate for the scientific goals of the research. Considerations of appropriateness may include disease/condition/behavior incidence, prevalence, or population burden, population representation, and/or current state of the science.

Feasibility:

  • Evaluate whether the proposed approach is sound and achievable, including plans to address problems or new challenges that emerge in the work. For proposed studies in which feasibility may be less certain, evaluate whether the uncertainty is balanced by the potential for major advances.
  • For applications involving human subjects, including clinical trials, evaluate the adequacy and feasibility of the plan to recruit and retain a study population that appropriately models the target population. Additionally, evaluate the likelihood of successfully achieving the proposed enrollment based on age, race, ethnicity, and sex.
  • For clinical trial applications, evaluate whether the study timeline and milestones are feasible.

Specific to this NOFO:

  • Evaluate whether the study questions are stated clearly.
  • Evaluate whether the primary and secondary outcome variables are described, justified, and there is a description of how they will be collected and measured.
  • Evaluate whether the timeline for implementing and completing the observational study is appropriate and clearly presented.
  • For biomarker analytic validation studies, evaluate whether the plans for analytic validation of the assay within the intended clinical context of use and metrics for validation of the assay are appropriate.
  • For biomarker clinical validation studies, evaluate whether the application proposes sufficient study participants/biospecimens for testing prevalence of the marker and associating assay results with a pre-specified clinical outcome within the intended clinical context.
  • For studies involving genomic or -omics analyses, evaluate whether the plan for biospecimen analysis is appropriate and justified.

 

Investigator(s)

Evaluate whether the investigator(s) have demonstrated background, training, and expertise, as appropriate for their career stage, to conduct the proposed work. For Multiple Principal Investigator (MPI) applications, assess the quality of the leadership plan to facilitate coordination and collaboration.

Environment

Evaluate whether the institutional resources are appropriate to ensure the successful execution of the proposed work.


Additional Review Criteria

As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, but will not give criterion scores for these items, and should consider them in providing an overall impact score.

 

For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects; 2) adequacy of protection against risks; 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others; 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained; and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.

For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption; 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics; and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.

This NOFO only accepts applications that do not propose clinical trials. Note: Applications may propose activities involving human subjects that are not deemed clinical trials.


 

When the proposed research includes Vertebrate Animals, evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals according to the following criteria: (1) description of proposed procedures involving animals, including species, strains, ages, sex, and total number to be used; (2) justifications for the use of animals versus alternative models and for the appropriateness of the species proposed; (3) interventions to minimize discomfort, distress, pain and injury; and (4) justification for euthanasia method if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animals Section.


 

When the proposed research includes Biohazards, evaluate whether specific materials or procedures that will be used are significantly hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and whether adequate protection is proposed.


 

As applicable, evaluate the full application as now presented.


 

As applicable, evaluate the progress made in the last funding period.


 

As applicable, evaluate the appropriateness of the proposed expansion of the scope of the project.


 

Specific to this NOFO, regarding the three additional documents included as "Other Attachments":

  • Evaluate whether the processes in the Quality Management Plan are adequate to assess and document adherence to clinical study procedures and ensure the quality of data collection procedures.
  • Evaluate whether the Clinical Data Management Plan adequately describes validated systems and controls to ensure the integrity of the clinical research data being collected.
  • If applicable, evaluate whether the Schedule of Events for an individual study participant is described and appropriate for the study design and data to be collected.

Additional Review Considerations

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

 

For projects involving key biological and/or chemical resources, evaluate the brief plans proposed for identifying and ensuring the validity of those resources.


 

Evaluate whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.


2. Review and Selection Process

Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s), convened by CSR, in accordance with NIH peer review policies and practices, using the stated review criteria. Assignment to a Scientific Review Group will be shown in the eRA Commons.

As part of the scientific peer review, all applications will receive a written critique.

Applications may undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit (generally the top half of applications under review) will be discussed and assigned an overall impact score.

Applications will be assigned on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines to the appropriate NIH Institute or Center. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the appropriate national Advisory Council or Board. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:

  • Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as determined by scientific peer review.
  • Availability of funds.
  • Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.

If the application is under consideration for funding, NIH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.5.1. Just-in-Time Procedures. This request is not a Notice of Award nor should it be construed to be an indicator of possible funding.

Prior to making an award, NIH reviews an applicant's federal award history in SAM.gov to ensure sound business practices. An applicant can review and comment on any information in the Responsibility/Qualification records available in SAM.gov. NIH will consider any comments by the applicant in the Responsibility/Qualification records in SAM.gov to ascertain the applicant's integrity, business ethics, and performance record of managing Federal awards per 2 CFR Part 200.206 "Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants." This provision will apply to all NIH grants and cooperative agreements except fellowships.

3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates

After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) via the eRA Commons. Refer to Part 1 for dates for peer review, advisory council review, and earliest start date.

Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.4.4 Disposition of Applications.

Section VI. Award Administration Information

1. Award Notices

A Notice of Award (NoA) is the official authorizing document notifying the applicant that an award has been made and that funds may be requested from the designated HHS payment system or office. The NoA is signed by the Grants Management Officer and emailed to the recipient's business official.

In accepting the award, the recipient agrees that any activities under the award are subject to all provisions currently in effect or implemented during the period of the award, other Department regulations and policies in effect at the time of the award, and applicable statutory provisions.

Recipients must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.6. Funding Restrictions. Any pre-award costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the applicant's own risk.  For more information on the Notice of Award, please refer to the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 5. The Notice of Award and NIH Grants & Funding website, see Award Process.

Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee Approval: Recipient institutions must ensure that protocols are reviewed by their IRB or IEC. To help ensure the safety of participants enrolled in NIH-funded studies, the recipient must provide NIH copies of documents related to all major changes in the status of ongoing protocols.

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

The following Federal wide and HHS-specific policy requirements apply to awards funded through NIH:

All federal statutes and regulations relevant to federal financial assistance, including those highlighted in NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 4 Public Policy Requirements, Objectives and Other Appropriation Mandates.

By applying for or accepting federal funds from HHS, recipients certify compliance with all federal antidiscrimination laws and these requirements and that complying with those laws is a material condition of receiving federal funding streams. Recipients are responsible for ensuring subrecipients, contractors, and partners also comply.

Applicants and recipients are strongly encouraged to refer to the NIH Director's Statement of Priorities, entitled "Advancing NIH's Mission Through a Unified Strategy." 

Recipients are responsible for ensuring that their activities comply with all applicable federal regulations. Pursuant to 2 CFR 200.340, by accepting an NIH award, the recipient agrees that continued funding for the award is contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds, recipient satisfactory performance, compliance with the Terms and Conditions of the award, and may also otherwise be terminated, to the extent authorized by law, if the agency determines that the award no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities, in line with 2 CFR 200.340(a)(4).

Pursuant to the Cybersecurity Act of 2015, Div. N, § 405, Pub. Law 114-113, 6 USC § 1533(d), the HHS Secretary has established a common set of voluntary, consensus-based, and industry-led guidelines, best practices, methodologies, procedures, and processes.

Successful recipients under this NOFO agree that:

When recipients, subrecipients, or third-party entities have:

  • ongoing and consistent access to HHS owned or operated information or operational technology systems; and
  • receive, maintain, transmit, store, access, exchange, process, or utilize personal identifiable information (PII) or personal health information (PHI) obtained from the awarding HHS agency for the purposes of executing the award.

Cybersecurity plans and procedures must at minimum include the following:

  • Develop cybersecurity plans and procedures, modeled after the NIST Cybersecurity framework, to protect HHS systems and data:
    • Identify:
      • Develop an inventory of all assets and accounts with access to HHS owned and operated information or operational technology systems or which obtain PII or PHI for the purposes of the award.
    • Protect:
      • Limit access to HHS owned and operated systems to only those in need of access to complete reward activities.
      • Require all staff to complete annual cybersecurity and privacy awareness training. Visit 405(d): Knowledge on Demand (hhs.gov) to obtain free trainings, if needed.
      • Enable multifactor authentication for all employees, subrecipients, and third-party entities to access HHS owned and operated information or operational technology systems.
      • Regularly backup sensitive data and test backups.
    • Detect:
      • Install anti-virus or anti-malware software on all devices, servers, and accounts used to connect to HHS owned and operated systems.
    • Respond:
      • Develop an incident response plan. See Incident-Response-Plan-Basics_508c.pdf (cisa.gov) to learn about developing incident response plans.
      • Have cybersecurity incident reporting procedures that ensure the relevant HHS awarding agencies are notified of a cybersecurity incident within 48 hours of discovery. A cybersecurity incident is defined as an unplanned interruption to a technology service or reduction in the quality of a technology service, or an occurrence that actually or potentially jeopardizes the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of an information system or the information the system processes, stores, or transmits.
    • Recover:
      • Investigate incidents and plug any security gaps identified. 

All activities proposed in your application and budget narrative must align with applicable law, including but not limited to statutes, executive orders, federal regulations and applicable judicial holdings.  Accordingly, discretionary awards shall not be used to fund, promote, encourage, subsidize, or facilitate; racial preferences or other forms of racial discrimination by the recipient, including activities where race or intentional proxies for race will be used as a selection criterion for employment or program participation; denial by the recipient of the sex binary in humans, or the belief that sex is a chosen or mutable characteristic; illegal immigration; or any other initiatives that compromise public safety.  If an application does not align, the application will not receive funding to the extent permitted by law and applicable court orders.

For applications involving substance abuse, the application must not support harm reduction. Please see Updated Funding Guidance for Recipients on Supplies and Services.

For applications involving funding Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) or medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), this funding should be used to provide comprehensive treatment and recovery support services rather than medication-only models for opioid use disorder. Services should include medications, where clinically indicated, in conjunction with psychosocial and other treatment and recovery support services. Funding can also be used to support individualized tapering and discontinuation of medications when clinically indicated. Please see Updated Funding Guidance for Recipients on  MAT/MOUD.

As of October 1, 2025, HHS has adopted 2 CFR Part 200, with some modifications included in 2 CFR Part 300. These regulations replace those in 45 CFR Part 75. However, for NIH, under the Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY 2026, (P.L. 119-75, Division B, Title II, Sec. 224), the provisions relating to indirect costs in 45 CFR 75 continue to apply to NIH awards. Consistent with the statute, NIH will not apply updated thresholds outlined within 2 CFR Part 200, at this time.

Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award

The following special terms of award are in addition to, and not in lieu of, otherwise applicable U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) administrative guidelines, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) grant administration regulations at 2 CFR Part 200, 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 recipients 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 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 recipients for the project as a whole, although specific tasks and activities may be shared among the recipients and NIH as defined below.

The PD(s)/PI(s) will have the primary responsibility for:

  • Providing scientific leadership for all aspects of the study, including any modification of study design, conduct of the study, quality control, data analysis and interpretation, preparation of publications, dissemination of data, tools, and technologies, and collaboration with other investigators. The PD(s)/PI(s) agrees to accept close coordination, cooperation, and participation of NIDCR staff in those aspects of scientific and technical management of the study as stated in these terms and conditions;
  • Adhering to the NIDCR Clinical Terms of Award requiring that studies be monitored commensurate with the degree of potential risk to study subjects and the complexity of the study;
  • Upon implementation of the study, following the procedures required by the protocol regarding study conduct and monitoring, participant management, data collection, and quality control;
  • Managing involvement of industry or any other third party in the study. Except for licensing of patents or copyrights, support or involvement of any third party will occur only following notification of and concurrence by the NIDCR;
  • Managing procedures to comply with the requirements of 45 CFR Part 46 for the protection and inclusion of human subjects in research;
  • Making all study materials, procedure manuals, and final datasets available in the public domain. Recipients are expected to publish and publicly disseminate results, data, and other products of the study, concordant with governance policies and protocols. Publications and oral presentations of work performed under this agreement will require appropriate acknowledgment of support by the NIH/NIDCR; and
  • Obtaining prior written approval of the NIDCR Grants Management Specialist, in consultation with the NIDCR Program Officer, for changes in any of the key personnel identified in the Notice of Grant Award.

Recipients 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 NIDCR Project Scientist will be assigned. The NIDCR Project Scientist will:

  • Serve as a resource to provide scientific/programmatic support during implementation of the research by providing input on experimental and clinical approaches and study protocols, and advising in the management and operational aspects of the research;
  • Participate on teleconferences with PD(s)/PI(s) to monitor study progress, adherence to the study protocol, conduct of the study, and accrual and retention of study participants;
  • Review the progress of the study, and of each participating component, through consideration of routine reporting, site visits, oversight committee recommendations, etc. This review may include, but not be limited to, compliance with the study protocol, meeting participant enrollment targets, adherence to uniform data collection procedures, and the timeliness and quality of data reporting.

An NIDCR Program Official will be assigned. The NIDCR Program Official will:

  • Carry out continuous review of all activities to ensure that the objectives are being met and that all regulatory, fiscal, and administrative matters are handled according to NIH guidelines;
  • Have the option to withhold support to a participating institution if technical performance requirements are not met;
  • 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 notice of award.

An NIDCR Medical Officer will monitor the studies and serve as the Medical Monitor.

  • The NIDCR reserves the right to terminate or curtail a study or any portion of a study in the event of (a) failure to implement the study protocol, (b) a substantial shortfall in participant recruitment, follow-up, data reporting and dissemination, quality control or other major breach of the protocol, (c) substantive changes in the agreed-upon protocol with which the NIDCR does not concur, (d) reaching a major study objective substantially before schedule with persuasive statistical evidence, or human subject ethical issues that may dictate a premature termination.

Areas of Joint Responsibility include:

  • None; all responsibilities are divided between recipients and NIH staff as described above.

Dispute Resolution:

Any disagreements that may arise in scientific or programmatic matters (within the scope of the award) between recipients and the NIH may be brought to Dispute Resolution. A Dispute Resolution Panel comprising three members will be convened. Members will be: a designee chosen by the PD/PI, 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 recipient. This special dispute resolution procedure does not alter the recipient's right to appeal an adverse action that is otherwise appealable in accordance with PHS regulation 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart D and HHS regulation 45 CFR Part 16.

3. Data Management and Sharing

A Data Management and Sharing Plan (DMS Plan) is required for any NIH-funded or conducted research that will generate scientific data. Applicants must submit the DMS Plan at the time of application using the NIH DMS Plan Format Page. The DMS Plan must address the elements in the structured format. Where the DMS Plan Format Page requires a "Yes or No" response, no additional narrative is allowed. 

4. Reporting

When multiple years are involved, recipients will be required to submit the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 8.4.1 Reporting. To learn more about post-award monitoring and reporting, see the NIH Grants & Funding website, see Post-Award Monitoring and Reporting.

A final RPPR, invention statement, and the expenditure data portion of the Federal Financial Report are required for closeout of an award, as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 8.6 Closeout. NIH NOFOs outline intended research goals and objectives. Post award, NIH will review and measure performance based on the details and outcomes that are shared within the RPPR, as described at 2 CFR Part 200.301.

Section VII. Agency Contacts

We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.

Application Submission Contacts

eRA Service Desk - Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons, application errors and warnings, documenting system problems that threaten submission by the due date, and post-submission issues.

Grants.gov Support Center - Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and services (e.g., Workspace, subscriptions).

Scientific/Research Contact(s)

National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)
Email: NIDCR-Program@nih.gov

Peer Review Contact(s)

Examine your eRA Commons account for review assignment and contact information (information appears two weeks after the submission due date).

Financial/Grants Management Contact(s)

National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)
Email: deeranotifications@nidcr.nih.gov

Section VIII. Other Information

Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Authority and Regulations

Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 2 CFR Part 200.