National Institutes of Health (NIH)
NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH (NIH)
This Notice Of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) is developed as a Common Fund initiative through the Office of the NIH Director, Office of Strategic Coordination. All NIH Institutes and Centers participate in Common Fund initiatives. Grants management of awards will be administered by the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research on behalf of NIH.
DP5 Early Independence Award
See Part 2, Section III. 3. Additional Information on Eligibility.
The NIH Director's Early Independence Award helps talented new researchers begin their own independent research program soon after finishing their doctoral degree or clinical training, without first doing postdoctoral training.The award accepts applications on any topic fitting the NIH mission. It is part of the NIH Common Fund's High-Risk, High-Reward Research program.
This listing covers multiple offices in the NIH Office of the Director that offer assistance awards or supplements to assistance awards.
| 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 |
| September 10, 2026 | Not Applicable | Not Applicable | March 2027 | May 2027 | July 2027 |
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.
No late applications will be accepted for this Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO).
Not Applicable
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 How to Apply - Application Guide and the NOFO) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV. When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the How to Apply - 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.
The NIH Director's Early Independence Award helps exceptional new scientists start independent research careers right after finishing their doctoral degree or clinical training, forgoing postdoctoral training. This award is intended for early-stage investigators who have a record of scientific innovation and research productivity and have demonstrated unusual scientific vision and maturity.
NIH program staff will hold a pre-application webinar to explain the program and answer questions about the application and review process. Check the NIH Calendar of Events for more information. Questions should be sent to EarlyIndependence@od.nih.gov. More information, FAQs, application guide, and webinar recording are on the Common Fund website.
Investigators proposing NIH-defined clinical trials may refer to the Research Methods Resources website for information about developing statistical methods and study designs.
See Section VIII. Other Information for award authorities and regulations.
Grant: A financial assistance mechanism providing money, property, or both to an eligible entity to carry out an approved project or activity.
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.
Optional: Accepting applications that either propose or do not propose clinical trial(s).
The NIH Common Fund expects to spend about $5.7 million to fund about 10 awards in FY 2027. The actual number of awards depends on available funding and the number of meritorious applications received. Funding in future years will depend on yearly budgets and satisfactory progress.
Application budgets can request up to $350,000 per year in direct costs, plus any allowed indirect costs.
The project can last up to five years.
NIH grants policies as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement will apply to the applications submitted and awards made from this NOFO.
Higher Education Institutions - Includes all types
Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education
For-Profit Organizations
Local Governments
Federal Governments
Other
Requests by NIH intramural scientists will be limited to incremental costs required for participation. As such, these requests will not include any salary and related fringe benefits for career, career conditional, or other Federal employees (civilian or uniformed service) with permanent appointments under existing position ceilings or any costs related to administrative or facilities support (equivalent to Facilities and Administrative or F&A costs). Allowable costs may include salary for staff to be specifically hired under a temporary appointment for the project, consultant costs, equipment, supplies, travel, and other items typically listed under Other Expenses. Applicants should indicate the number of person-months devoted to the project, even if no funds are requested for salary and fringe benefits.
If selected, funding will be provided by the NIH Common Fund through the NIH Intramural Program. NIH intramural scientists will participate in this program as PD/PIs in accordance with the Terms and Conditions provided in this funding opportunity. Intellectual property will be managed in accord with established policy of the NIH in compliance with Executive Order 10096, as amended, 45 CFR Part 7; patent rights for inventions developed in NIH facilities are NIH property unless NIH waives its rights.
Should an extramural application include collaboration with an intramural scientist, no funds for the support of the intramural scientist may be requested in the application. The intramural scientist may submit a separate request for intramural funding as described above and in the NIH Intramural Source Book.
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 allowed.
NIH will no longer issue awards (i.e., new, renewal, or non-competing continuation) to domestic or foreign entities that involve foreign subawards/subcontracts. All NIH-funded research involving foreign subawards/subcontracts must be submitted in response to a NOFO that is specifically designated for funded international collaborations. See NIH Grants Policy Statement 16.8 Collaborative International Research Awards.
Applications involving foreign subawards/subcontracts submitted in response to this NOFO will be deemed noncompliant and will not be considered for funding. This policy applies to all monetary international collaborations resulting in foreign subawards/subcontracts, however, it does not preclude unfunded international collaborations or foreign components, funding for foreign consultants, or procurement of unique equipment or supplies from foreign vendors.
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 NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 2.3.9.2 Electronically Submitted Applications for additional information
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.
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.
Requirements:
The PD/PI may become independent before the award starts and still remain eligible.
This NOFO does not require cost sharing as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 1.2 Definition of Terms.
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:
Only two applications per institution (identified by Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) number or NIH IPF number) are allowed.
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.
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 How to Apply - Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.
All page limitations described in the How to Apply – Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed.
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.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Agency Routing Identifier (Field 4b): Enter science area designations.
Choose the science area best fitting your proposal. You may choose a second science area if needed.
How to enter it:
These science areas are broad and may overlap; choose the one that best matches your project.
Science area(s) is/are used only to help NIH assign reviewers. It does not affect funding decisions. All applications follow the same instructions, are reviewed at the same time with the same review criteria, and compete for the same funding.
Note: Also include the same science area designation(s) at the beginning of the Research Strategy essay.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Upload this file as "FacilitiesandOtherResources".
The institution must show it will provide a strong environment for the PD/PI to succeed as an independent researcher. Address every item below or the application may be withdrawn for noncompliance.
Use the headings and numbering below. There is no page limit, but responses should be clear, concise, and complete.
Candidate Selection Process
Explain how and why the institution chose the PD/PI.
Position Details
During the award, the PD/PI must be scientifically and administratively independent.
Position title and type: Describe the position including title, and whether permanent, non-permanent, tenure-track, etc.
Institutional Resources Commitment
Describe resources and support the institution will provide.
Institutional Commitment to Career Development
Explain how the institution will help the PD/PI build a successful independent career.
Mentoring
Only attach Foreign Justification, if applicable.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Only the PD/PI canbe listed as a Senior/Key person and submit a Biographical Sketch.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:
Specific Aims page must include the following headings and information:
Research Objectives
Describe your research topic and approach.
Highlight the project's innovation.
Institutional Support
Explain how your institution's support, including support for your independence, will help you meet your research goals.
Early Independence Rationale
Explain how your scientific background, research achievements, leadership or mentoring qualities, and scientific vision will help you carry out the project successfully.
Project Science Area: List the 1-digit code and abbreviation for the primary (and optional secondary) science area for your project. Use the format described in Agency Routing Identifier instructions above.
Research Strategy Essay: Use the numbered headings below and answer each set of questions.
Reasoning to skip or shorten postdoctoral training
Collaborators and consultants should submit letters describing their role and commitment to the project.
The institution must also submit a support letter confirming it will provide resources and support described in the application and that the PD/PI will hold an independent research position by September 30, 2027. The letter must be signed by officials responsible for creating and overseeing the position, such as the department head and institutional business official.
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:
Appendix: Only limited Appendix materials are allowed. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the How to Apply - Application Guide.
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.
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.
All instructions in the How to Apply - Application Guide must be followed.
Since all applications are received as "Office of the Director" applications and are reviewed by a single Special Emphasis Panel, applicants should not request assignment to a particular Institute/Center or review panel. Names and affiliations of significant collaborators should be listed as individuals who should not review the application to help exclude conflicts during reviewer assignment.
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
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.
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
All NIH awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Pre-award costs are allowable only as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement Section 7.9.1 Selected Items of Cost.
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.
Letters of reference are required. The PD/PI must arrange for 3 to 5 letters. Late letters are not accepted. If fewer than 3 are submitted, the application is incomplete and will not be reviewed. The PD/PI must check eRA Commons to make sure at least 3 letters are received on time.
Letters are confidential and cannot be viewed by the PD/PI. The PD/PI should not upload them on behalf of referees. Both the PD/PI and referee will receive email confirmation when a letter is submitted.
Instructions to Referees
Letters may be submitted between August 10 and September 10, 2026, by 5:00 PM local time.
Required Referee Information (the individual providing the letter of reference):
Referee's First and Last Name
Required PD/PI Information
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.
Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy
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.
For this NOFO, note the following:
The NIH Director's Early Independence Award helps outstanding researchers move quickly into independent positions soon after finishing their doctoral degree or clinical training, forgoing postdoctoral training. Reviewers will consider all criteria, but will emphasize investigator qualities and institutional environment and support. Substantial preliminary data are not expected; instead, the approach should be compelling and well-reasoned.
The review happens in two phases:
Both groups use the same review criteria.
A proposed Clinical Trial application may include study design, methods, and intervention that are not by themselves innovative but address important questions or unmet needs. Additionally, the results of the clinical trial may indicate that further clinical development of the intervention is unwarranted or lead to new avenues of scientific investigation.
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 review criteria and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).
Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit and give a separate score for each. An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field.
Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project rigorous? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
Are the scientific rationale and need for a clinical trial to test the proposed hypothesis or intervention well supported by preliminary data, clinical and/or preclinical studies, or information in the literature or knowledge of biological mechanisms? For trials focusing on clinical or public health endpoints, is this clinical trial necessary for testing the safety, efficacy or effectiveness of an intervention that could lead to a change in clinical practice, community behaviors or health care policy? For trials focusing on mechanistic, physiological, biochemical, or other biomedical endpoints, is this trial needed to advance scientific understanding?
Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or those in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
With regard to the proposed leadership for the project, do the PD/PI(s) and key personnel have the expertise, experience, and ability to organize, manage and implement the proposed clinical trial and meet milestones and timelines? Do they have appropriate expertise in study coordination, data management and statistics? For a multicenter trial, is the organizational structure appropriate and does the application identify a core of potential center investigators and staffing for a coordinating center?
Specific to this NOFO:
Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
Does the design/research plan include innovative elements, as appropriate, that enhance its sensitivity, potential for information or potential to advance scientific knowledge or clinical practice? For example, innovative designs such as platform trials, adaptive, including real-time adaptive methods, seamless Phase I/II designs, and Bayesian designs are encouraged as applicable.
Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have the investigators included plans to address weaknesses in the rigor of prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?
If the project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, are the plans to address 1) the protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion or exclusion of individuals of all ages (including children and older adults), justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
Does the application adequately address the following, if applicable
Study Design
Is the study design justified and appropriate to address primary and secondary outcome variable(s)/endpoints that will be clear, informative and relevant to the hypothesis being tested? Is the scientific rationale/premise of the study based on previously well-designed preclinical and/or clinical research? Given the methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions, is the study design adequately powered to answer the research question(s), test the proposed hypothesis/hypotheses, and provide interpretable results? Is the trial appropriately designed to conduct the research efficiently? Are the study populations (size, sex, age, demographic group), proposed intervention arms/dose, and duration of the trial, appropriate and well justified?
Are potential ethical issues adequately addressed? Is the process for obtaining informed consent or assent appropriate? Is the eligible population available? Are the plans for recruitment outreach, enrollment, retention, handling dropouts, missed visits, and losses to follow-up appropriate to ensure robust data collection? Are the planned recruitment timelines feasible and is the plan to monitor accrual adequate? Has the need for randomization (or not), masking (if appropriate), controls, and inclusion/exclusion criteria been addressed? Are differences addressed, if applicable, in the intervention effect due to sex and race/ethnicity?
Are the plans to standardize, assure quality of, and monitor adherence to, the trial protocol and data collection or distribution guidelines appropriate? Is there a plan to obtain required study agent(s)? Does the application propose to use existing available resources, as applicable?
Data Management and Statistical Analysis
Are planned analyses and statistical approach appropriate for the proposed study design and methods used to assign participants and deliver interventions? Are the procedures for data management and quality control of data adequate at clinical site(s) or at center laboratories, as applicable? Have the methods for standardization of procedures for data management to assess the effect of the intervention and quality control been addressed? Is there a plan to complete data analysis within the proposed period of the award?
Specific to this NOFO:
Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?
In addition, for applications involving clinical trials
If proposed, are the administrative, data coordinating, enrollment and laboratory/testing centers, appropriate for the trial proposed?
Does the application adequately address the capability and ability to conduct the trial at the proposed site(s) or centers? Are the plans to add or drop enrollment centers, as needed, appropriate?
If international site(s) is/are proposed, does the application adequately address the complexity of executing the clinical trial?
If multi-sites/centers, is there evidence of the ability of the individual site or center to: (1) enroll the proposed numbers; (2) adhere to the protocol; (3) collect and transmit data in an accurate and timely fashion; and, (4) operate within the proposed organizational structure?
Specific to this NOFO:
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give separate scores for these items.
Specific to applications involving clinical trials
Is the study timeline described in detail, taking into account start-up activities, the anticipated rate of enrollment, and planned follow-up assessment? Is the projected timeline feasible and well justified? Does the project incorporate efficiencies and utilize existing resources (e.g., CTSAs, practice-based research networks, electronic medical records, administrative database, or patient registries) to increase the efficiency of participant enrollment and data collection, as appropriate?
Are potential challenges and corresponding solutions discussed (e.g., strategies that can be implemented in the event of enrollment shortfalls)?
For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.
When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research.
The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following three points: (1) a complete description of all proposed procedures including the species, strains, ages, sex, and total numbers of animals to be used; (2) justifications that the species is appropriate for the proposed research and why the research goals cannot be accomplished using an alternative non-animal model; and (3) interventions including analgesia, anesthesia, sedation, palliative care, and humane endpoints that will be used to limit any unavoidable discomfort, distress, pain and injury in the conduct of scientifically valuable research. Methods of euthanasia and justification for selected methods, if NOT consistent with the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals, is also required but is found in a separate section of the application. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals Section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animals Section.
Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.
For Resubmissions (as applicable), the committee will evaluate the application as now presented, taking into consideration the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group and changes made to the project.
For Renewals (as applicable), the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.
For Revisions (as applicable), the committee will consider the appropriateness of the proposed expansion of the scope of the project. If the Revision application relates to a specific line of investigation presented in the original application that was not recommended for approval by the committee, then the committee will consider whether the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group are adequate and whether substantial changes are clearly evident.
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.
Not Applicable.
Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).
Reviewers will comment on whether the Resource Sharing Plan(s) (e.g., Sharing Model Organisms) or the rationale for not sharing the resources, is reasonable.
For projects involving key biological and/or chemical resources, reviewers will comment on the brief plans proposed for identifying and ensuring the validity of those resources.
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by (an) appropriate Scientific Review Group(s) convened by 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.
Requests for reconsideration of initial peer review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this NOFO.
Applications will remain in the Office of the Director with the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research performing grants management. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this funding opportunity. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the Council of Councils. The following will be considered in funding decisions:
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.
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.
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.
Individual awards are based on the application submitted to, and as approved by, the NIH and are subject to the IC-specific terms and conditions identified in the NoA.
ClinicalTrials.gov: If an award provides for one or more clinical trials. By law (Title VIII, Section 801 of Public Law 110-85), the "responsible party" must register and submit results information for certain "applicable clinical trials" on the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System Information Website (https://register.clinicaltrials.gov). NIH expects registration and results reporting of all trials whether required under the law or not. For more information, see https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/reporting/index.htm
Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee Approval: Recipient institutions must ensure that all 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.
Data and Safety Monitoring Requirements: The NIH policy for data and safety monitoring requires oversight and monitoring of all NIH-conducted or -supported human biomedical intervention studies (clinical trials) to ensure the safety of participants and the validity and integrity of the data. Further information concerning these requirements is found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/hs/data_safety.htm and in the application instructions (SF424 (R&R) and PHS 398).
Investigational New Drug or Investigational Device Exemption Requirements: Consistent with federal regulations, clinical research projects involving the use of investigational therapeutics, vaccines, or other medical interventions (including licensed products and devices for a purpose other than that for which they were licensed) in humans under a research protocol must be performed under a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigational new drug (IND) or investigational device exemption (IDE).
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:
Cybersecurity plans and procedures must at minimum include the following:
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.
Not Applicable
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.
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.
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.
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).
Office of the Director (OD)
Email: EarlyIndependence@od.nih.gov
Examine your eRA Commons account for review assignment and contact information (information appears two weeks after the submission due date).
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)
Email: deeranotifications@nidcr.nih.gov
Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. A full list of policy notices published by NIH is provided in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 2 CFR Part 200.