text:
Department of Health and Human Services
Participating Organizations
National Institutes of Health (NIH), http://www.nih.gov
Components of Participating Organizations
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), http://www.nida.nih.gov
Title:Medications Development for the Treatment of Cannabis-Related Disorders (R01)
Announcement Type
Update: The following updates relating to this announcement have been issued:
NOTICE: Applications submitted in response to this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) for Federal assistance must be submitted electronically through Grants.gov (http://www.grants.gov) using the SF424 Research and Related (R&R) forms and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
This FOA must be read in conjunction with the application guidelines included with this announcement in Grants.gov/Apply for Grants (hereafter called Grants.gov/Apply).
A registration process is necessary before submission and applicants are highly encouraged to start the process at least four weeks prior to the grant submission date. See Section IV.
Program Announcement (PA) Number: PA-07-365
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number(s)
Key Dates
Release Date: April 24, 2007
Opening Date: May 5, 2007 (Earliest date an application may be submitted to Grants.gov)
NOTE: On time submission requires that applications be successfully submitted to Grants.gov no later than 5:00 p.m. local time (of the applicant institution/organization).
Application Submission/Receipt Date(s): Standard dates apply, please see
AIDS Application Submission/Receipt Date(s): Standard dates apply, please see http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm#AIDS.
Peer Review Date(s): Standard dates apply, please see http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm#reviewandaward
Council Review Date(s): Standard dates apply, please see http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm#reviewandaward
Earliest Anticipated Start Date(s): Standard dates apply, please see http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm#reviewandaward
Additional Information To Be Available Date (URL Activation Date): Not Applicable
Expiration Date: May 8, 2010
Due Dates for E.O. 12372
Not Applicable
Additional Overview Content
Executive Summary
Table of Contents
Part I Overview Information
Part II Full Text of Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
1. Research Objectives
Section II. Award Information
1. Mechanism of Support
2. Funds Available
Section III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants
A. Eligible Institutions
B. Eligible Individuals
2. Cost Sharing or Matching
3. Other-Special Eligibility Criteria
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Request Application Information
2. Content and Form of Application Submission
3. Submission Dates and Times
A. Submission, Review, and Anticipated Start Dates
1. Letter of Intent
B. Submitting an Application Electronically to the NIH
C. Application Processing
4. Intergovernmental Review
5. Funding Restrictions
6. Other Submission Requirements
Section V. Application Review Information
1. Criteria
2. Review and Selection Process
A. Additional Review Criteria
B. Additional Review Considerations
C. Sharing Research Data
D. Sharing Research Resources
3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates
Section VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
3. Reporting
Section VII. Agency Contacts
1. Scientific/Research Contact(s)
2. Peer Review Contact(s)
3. Financial/Grants Management Contact(s)
Section VIII. Other Information - Required Federal Citations
Part II - Full Text of Announcement
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
1. Research Objectives
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) issued by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) solicits research applications to conduct preclinical and clinical research aimed at the identification, evaluation and development of safe and effective medications for the treatment of Cannabis-Related Disorders (CRDs) and their medical and psychiatric consequences. They include the Cannabis Use Disorders (CUDs) such cannabis abuse and dependence, the Cannabis Induced Disorders (CIDs) such as intoxication, psychosis, and anxiety induced by cannabis use, as well as the comorbidity of the CRDs with other medical and psychiatric disorders (e.g., depression). Cannabis use includes marijuana, hashish, and other tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) containing substances. NIDA is encouraging research in this area because there is a high prevalence of marijuana use in the general population accompanied with an increasing misperception that its use poses low health risk, there is limited research in this area, there are no safe and effective pharmacological treatments available for these disorders.
This FOA will support the development of new chemical entities (NCEs) for advancement to preclinical and clinical development stages. Grant applications may include pharmacological studies on NCEs leading to the identification of candidates for advanced preclinical and clinical evaluation as potential pharmacotherapies for CRDs, as well as pharmacokinetic and/or pharmacodynamic studies of potentially therapeutic compounds. Clinical grant applications may test the safety and/or efficacy of marketed or non-marketed medications for the treatment of one or various CRDs, the clinical manifestations of these disorders, or the comorbidity of CRDs with other medical and/or psychiatric conditions. Clinical studies may include human laboratory studies to develop models for testing medications for CRDs. Studies may also target the pharmacological interaction of cannabinoid agents with other medications and/or their effects on other medical or psychiatric conditions.
Currently, marijuana is the most commonly used illicit drug in the United States. According to the 2005 National Survey of Drug Use and Health, 97.5 million Americans age 12 and older have used marijuana in their lifetime and 14.6 million have used it in the past month. About one half of the past-month marijuana users are between 12 and 25 years of age. Approximately 2.1 million people use marijuana for the first time every year and about two thirds of them are between 12 and 17 years of age. The proportion of individuals who perceived that there is a risk if they smoke marijuana once or twice a week is lower (55%) than the risk perceived from using cocaine (79.9%), heroin (81.8%) or smoking one or more packs of cigarettes per day (68%). However, CUDs are by far the most frequent past-year illicit drug use disorders. Of the 6.8 million people 12 and older who met criteria for illicit drug use disorders in the past year, 4.1 million (60.2%) had a CUD followed by cocaine and pain relievers (1.5 million each).
An estimated 852,000 individuals reported marijuana as the specific substance for which they received their last or current treatment among persons who received treatments in the past year and approximately one half of those individuals were 25 years old or younger. Research has demonstrated that the chronic use of cannabis can produce serious physical and psychological consequences. Consequences of cannabis use can result from acute exposure related to intoxication or chronic exposure that may ultimately produce abuse or dependence. The use of a large amount in a short period of time may induce hallucinations, delirium, and other perceptual manifestations compatible with a psychotic episode. Chronic users of cannabis may experience difficulty in stopping or controlling drug use, develop tolerance to the subjective and cardiovascular effects, and eventually present withdrawal symptoms after sudden discontinuation of use.
Long-term heavy use may also produce cognitive changes that affect memory and learning and, in predisposed individuals, induce psychosis and other perceptual phenomena, anxiety, depression and suicidal ideation. In young people, cannabis use additionally seems to affect the normal development of adolescence, and is associated with poor school performance, early problems with the law, and the use of other drugs and alcohol.
Cannabis use has been associated with cardio-respiratory problems, such as aggravation of asthma, bronchitis, emphysema, hypertension and arrhythmias, immune suppression, increased risk of sexually transmitted diseases and possibly developing cancer.
Given the extent of the use of cannabis in the general population and the medical and psychological consequences of its use, there is a great public health need to develop safe and effective therapeutic interventions for CRDs and their health consequences. The need to develop treatments targeting adolescents and young adults is particularly relevant in view of their disproportionate use patterns.
Unfortunately, there is currently no effective pharmacological treatment for CRDs and there is very limited research focused on the identification and development of medications to treat these disorders. Drug abuse treatment research as a whole has rarely focused on the treatment of CRDs. One indicator is the fact that there are no published randomized controlled clinical trials to evaluate the safety and efficacy of pharmacotherapies for CRDs as the primary outcomes.
Results from recent studies are setting the stage for the development of medications to treat CRDs. First, there are newly marketed medications available whose mechanisms of actions may have potential therapeutic effects on the clinical manifestations of CRD. Second, recent discoveries provide much deeper understanding of the basic mechanisms of cannabis action. These include the identification of and endogenous cannabinoid system with specific receptors and endogenous ligands, the availability of genetically engineered knockout mice that lack functional cannabinoid receptors to study genetic predispositions to the effects of cannabinoids, and the subsequent development of reliable pre-clinical models to study the rewarding and dependence-producing effects of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Lastly, there is the discovery and development of new chemical entities, some of them already being investigated at the clinical level, which target the cannabinoid system and have the potential for therapeutic benefit.
Areas of Interest
The major goal of this FOA is to develop safe and effective medications for the treatment of CRDs. Grant proposals should focus on the treatment of marijuana, hashish or other cannabis derivatives. Medications studied under this PA may aim to treat cannabis-use disorders, such as abuse and dependence; cannabis-induced disorders, such as intoxication, delirium, psychosis, and anxiety; the health consequences of cannabis use; or the comorbidity of CRDs with other medical and psychiatric disorders (e.g., depression).
Research topics of interest include but are not limited to:
The rationale for choosing the medication(s) to be investigated can be based on a top-down approach, a bottom-up approach, or both approaches combined. The top-down approach would be the testing of marketed medications that are available for other indications and which may be promising candidates for the treatment of CRDs. For example, an FDA approved antidepressant may be chosen as a target medication. The bottom-up approach involves the identification and testing of new chemical entities that, because of their chemical characteristics and mechanism of action, could be candidates to be developed specifically for CRDs.
The testing of combinations of medications is within the scope of this FOA. Medications may target one or more neurochemical mechanisms implicated in the physiopathology of CRDs by direct or indirect modulation of the systems, or by producing synergistic or antagonist effects.
The treatment of CRDs usually requires a multidisciplinary approach, including behavioral treatment strategies. Therefore, it is expected that the medication treatment studies proposed under this FOA should have a behavioral intervention platform or propose the concurrent evaluation of medications and behavioral interventions in a 2X2 design.
Special Considerations
HIV/AIDS Counseling and Testing Policy for the National Institute on Drug Abuse: In light of recent significant advances in rapid testing for HIV and in effective treatments for HIV, NIDA has revised its 2001 policy on HIV counseling and testing. NIDA-funded researchers are strongly encouraged to provide and/or refer research subjects to HIV risk reduction education and education about the benefits of HIV treatment, counseling and testing, referral to treatment, and other appropriate interventions to prevent acquisition and transmission of HIV. This policy applies to all NIDA funded research conducted domestically or internationally. For more information see https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-DA-07-013.html.
National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse Recommended Guidelines for the Administration of Drugs to Human Subjects: The National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse (NACDA) recognizes the importance of research involving the administration of drugs with abuse potential, and dependence or addiction liability, to human subjects. Potential applicants are encouraged to obtain and review these recommendations of Council before submitting an application that will administer compounds to human subjects. The guidelines are available on NIDA's Web site athttp://www.nida.nih.gov/about/organization/nacda/CouncilStatement.html.
See Section VIII, Other Information
- Required Federal Citations, for policies
related to this announcement.
Section II. Award Information
1. Mechanism
of Support
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) will use the NIH Research Project Grant (R01) award mechanism.
The applicant will be solely responsible for planning, directing, and executing the proposed project.
This FOA uses Just-in-Time information concepts. It also uses the modular as well as the non-modular budget formats (see https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm).
Specifically, if you are a U.S. organization and are submitting an application with direct costs in each year of $250,000 or less (excluding consortium Facilities and Administrative [F&A] costs), use the PHS398 Modular Budget component provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Package and SF424 (R&R) Application Guide (see specifically Section 3.4, Modular Budget Component, of the Application Guide).
U.S. applicants requesting more than $250,000 in annual direct costs and all foreign applicants must complete and submit budget requests using the Research & Related Budget component found in the application package for this FOA. See NOT-OD-06-096, August 23, 2006.
2. Funds Available
Because the nature and scope of the proposed research will vary from application to application, it is anticipated that the size and duration of each award will also vary. Although the financial plans of the Institutes and Centers (ICs) provide support for this program, awards pursuant to this funding opportunity are contingent upon the availability of funds and the submission of a sufficient number of meritorious applications.
NIH grants policies as described in the NOT-OD-05-004,
November 2, 2004.
Section III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants
1.A. Eligible Institutions
You may submit an application(s) if your institution/organization has any of the following characteristics:
1.B. Eligible Individuals
Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the PD/PI is invited to work with his/her organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for NIH support.
More than one PD/PI, or multiple PDs/PIs, may be designated on the application for projects that require a team science approach that clearly does not fit the single-PD/PI model.Additional information on the implementation plans and policies and procedures to formally allow more than one PD/PI on individual research projects is available at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/multi_pi. All PDs/PIs must be registered in the NIH eRA Commons prior to the submission of the application (see http://era.nih.gov/ElectronicReceipt/preparing.htm for instructions).
The decision of whether to apply for a single PD/PI or multiple PD/PI grant is the responsibility of the investigators and applicant organizations and should be determined by the scientific goals of the project. Applications for multiple PD/PI grants will require additional information, as outlined in the instructions below. When considering multiple PDs/PIs, please be aware that the structure and governance of the PD/PI leadership team as well as the knowledge, skills and experience of the individual PD/PIs will be factored into the assessment of the overall scientific merit of the application. Multiple PDs/PIs on a project share the authority and responsibility for leading and directing the project, intellectually and logistically.Each PD/PI is responsible and accountable to the grantee organization, or, as appropriate, to a collaborating organization, for the proper conduct of the project or program, including the submission of required reports. For further information on multiple PDs/PIs, please see https://grants.nih.gov/grants/multi_pi.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching
This program does not require cost sharing as defined in the current NIH Grants Policy Statement.
3. Other-Special Eligibility Criteria
Competing renewal applications are allowed. Applicants may submit more than one application, provided each application is scientifically distinct.
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
Appropriate registrations with Grants.gov and eRA Commons must be completed on or before the due date in order to successfully submit an application. Several of the steps of the registration process could take four weeks or more. Therefore, applicants should immediately check with their business official to determine whether their organization/institution is already registered with both Grants.gov and the Commons. All registrations must be complete by the submission deadline for the application to be considered ?on-time? (see 3.C.1 for more information about on-time submission).
download a SF424 (R&R) Application Package
and SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for completing the SF424 (R&R)
forms for this FOA, link to http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/apply-for-grants.html and
follow the directions provided on that Web site.
A one-time registration is required for institutions/organizations at both:
PDs/PIs should work with their institutions/organizations to make sure they are registered in the eRA Commons.
Several additional separate actions are required before an applicant institution/organization can submit an electronic application, as follows:
1) Organizational/Institutional Registration in Grants.gov/Get Registered
2) Organizational/Institutional Registration in the eRA Commons
3) Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) Registration in the NIH eRA Commons: Refer to the NIH eRA Commons System (COM) Users Guide.
Both the PD/PI(s) and AOR/SO need separate accounts in the NIH eRA Commons since both are authorized to view the application image.
Note that if a PD/PI is also an NIH peer-reviewer with an Individual DUNS and CCR registration, that particular DUNS number and CCR registration are for the individual reviewer only. These are different than any DUNS number and CCR registration used by an applicant organization. Individual DUNS and CCR registration should be used only for the purposes of personal reimbursement and should not be used on any grant applications submitted to the Federal Government.
Several of the steps of the registration process could take four weeks or more. Therefore, applicants should immediately check with their business official to determine whether their organization/institution is already registered in both Grants.gov and the Commons. The NIH will accept electronic applications only from organizations that have completed all necessary registrations.
1. Request
Application Information
Applicants must download the SF424 (R&R) application forms and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for this FOA through Grants.gov/Apply.
Note: Only the forms package
directly attached to a specific FOA can be used. You will not be able
to use any other SF424 (R&R) forms (e.g., sample forms, forms from
another FOA), although some of the "Attachment" files may be
useable for more than one FOA.
For further assistance, contact GrantsInfo: Telephone 301-710-0267, Email: email@example.com.
Telecommunications for the hearing impaired: TTY 301-451-5936.
2. Content and Form of Application Submission
Prepare all applications using the SF424 (R&R) application forms and in accordance with the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for this FOA through Grants.gov/Apply.
The SF424 (R&R) Application Guide is critical to submitting a complete and accurate application to NIH. There are fields within the SF424 (R&R) application components that, although not marked as mandatory, are required by NIH (e.g., the Credential log-in field of the Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile component must contain the PD/PIs assigned eRA Commons User ID). Agency-specific instructions for such fields are clearly identified in the Application Guide. For additional information, see Frequently Asked Questions Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications.
The SF424 (R&R) application has several components. Some components are required, others are optional. The forms package associated with this FOA in Grants.gov/APPLY includes all applicable components, required and optional. A completed application in response to this FOA includes the data in the following components:
Required Components:
SF424 (R&R) (Cover component)
Research & Related Project/Performance Site Locations
Research & Related Other Project Information
Research & Related Senior/Key Person
PHS398 Cover Page Supplement
PHS398 Research Plan
PHS398 Checklist
PHS398 Modular Budget or Research & Related Budget,
as appropriate (See Section IV.6., Special Instructions, regarding appropriate required budget component.)
Research & Related Budget (required for foreign applications)
Optional Components:
PHS398 Cover Letter File
Research & Related Subaward Budget Attachment(s) Form
Foreign Organizations (Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entity)
NIH policies concerning grants to foreign (non-U.S.) organizations can be found in the NIH Grants Policy Statement at: https://grants.nih.gov/archive/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/index.htm#_Toc54600260.
Applications from foreign organizations must:
Proposed research should provide special opportunities for furthering research programs through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental conditions in other countries that are not readily available in the United States or that augment existing U.S. resources.
Applications with Multiple PDs/PIs
When multiple PDs/PIs are proposed, NIH requires one PD/PI to be designated as the "Contact PI, who will be responsible for all communication between the PDs/PIs and the NIH, for assembling the application materials outlined below, and for coordinating progress reports for the project. The contact PD/PI must meet all eligibility requirements for PD/PI status in the same way as other PDs/PIs, but has no other special roles or responsibilities within the project team beyond those mentioned above.
Information for the Contact PD/PI should be entered in Item 13 of the SF424 (R&R) Cover component.All other PDs/PIs should be listed in the Research & Related Senior/Key Person component and assigned the project role of PD/PI.Please remember that all PDs/PIs must be registered in the eRA Commons prior to application submission.The Commons ID of each PD/PI must be included in the Credential field of the Research & Related Senior/Key Person component.Failure to include this data field will cause the application to be rejected.
All projects proposing Multiple PDs/PIs will be required to include a new section describing the leadership of the project.
Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan: For applications designating multiple PDs/PIs, a new section of the research plan, entitled Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan, must be included. A rationale for choosing a multiple PD/PI approach should be described. The governance and organizational structure of the leadership team and the research project should be described, including communication plans, process for making decisions on scientific direction, and procedures for resolving conflicts.The roles and administrative, technical, and scientific responsibilities for the project or program should be delineated for the PDs/PIs and other collaborators.
If budget allocation is planned, the distribution of resources to specific components of the project or the individual PDs/PIs should be delineated in the Leadership Plan. In the event of an award, the requested allocations may be reflected in a footnote on the Notice of Award.
Applications Involving a Single Institution
When all PDs/PIs are within a single institution, follow the instructions contained in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.
Applications Involving Multiple Institutions
When multiple institutions are involved, one institution must be designated as the prime institution and funding for the other institution(s) must be requested via a subcontract to be administered by the prime institution. When submitting a detailed budget, the prime institution should submit its budget using the Research & Related Budget component.All other institutions should have their individual budgets attached separately to the Research & Related Subaward Budget Attachment(s) Form.See Section 4.8 of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for further instruction regarding the use of the subaward budget form.
When submitting a modular budget, the prime institution completes the PHS398 Modular Budget component only.Information concerning the consortium/subcontract budget is provided in the budget justification. Separate budgets for each consortium/subcontract grantee are not required when using the Modular budget format. See Section 3.4 of the Application Guide for further instruction regarding the use of the PHS398 Modular Budget component.
3. Submission Dates and Times
See Section IV.3.A. for details.
3.A. Submission, Review, and Anticipated Start Dates
Opening Date:May 5, 2007(Earliest date an application may be
submitted to Grants.gov)
Letters of Intent Receipt Date(s): Not required.
Application Submission/Receipt Date(s): Standard dates apply, please see https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm
AIDS Application Submission/ Receipt Date(s): Standard dates apply, please see http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm#AIDS
Peer Review Date(s): Standard dates apply, please see http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm#reviewandaward
Council Review Date(s): Standard dates apply, please see http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm#reviewandaward
Earliest Anticipated Start Date(s): Standard dates apply, please see http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/submissionschedule.htm#reviewandaward
3.A.1. Letter of Intent
A letter of intent is not required for the funding opportunity.
3.B. Submitting an Application
Electronically to the NIH
To submit an application in response to this FOA, applicants should access this FOA via http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/apply-for-grants.html and follow steps 1-4. Note: Applications must only be submitted electronically. PAPER APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.
3.C. Application Processing
3.C.1 Submitting On-Time
Applications may be submitted on or after the opening date and must be successfully received by Grants.gov no later than 5:00 p.m. local time(of the applicant institution/organization) on the application due date(s). (See Section IV.3.A. for all dates.) If an application is not submitted by the due date(s) and time, the application may be delayed in the review process or not reviewed. All applications must meet the following criteria to be considered on-time:
Please visit http://era.nih.gov/electronicReceipt/app_help.htm for detailed information on what to do if Grants.gov or eRA system issues threaten your ability to submit on time.
Submission to Grants.gov is not the last step - applicants must follow their application through to the eRA Commons to check for errors and warnings and view their assembled application!
3.C.2 Two Day Window to Correct eRA Identified Errors/Warnings
IMPORTANT NOTE! NIH has eliminated the error correction window for due dates of January 25, 2011 and beyond. As of January 25, all corrections must be complete by the due date for an application to be considered on-time. See NOT-OD-10-123.
Once an application package has been successfully submitted through Grants.gov NIH provides applicants a two day error correction window to correct any eRA identified errors or warnings before a final assembled application is created in the eRA Commons. The standard error correction window is two (2) business days, beginning the day after the submission deadline and excluding weekends and standard federal holidays. All errors must be corrected to successfully complete the submission process. Warnings will not prevent the application from completing the submission process.
Note that the following caveats apply:
3.C.3 Viewing an Application in the eRA Commons
Once any eRA identified errors have been addressed and the assembled application has been created in the eRA Commons, the PD/PI and the Authorized Organization Representative/Signing Official (AOR/SO) have two weekdays (Monday Friday, excluding Federal holidays) to view the assembled application before it automatically moves forward to NIH for further processing.
Upon receipt, applications
will be evaluated for completeness by the Center for Scientific Review,
NIH. Incomplete applications will not be reviewed.
There will be an acknowledgement of receipt of applications from Grants.gov and the Commons. The submitting AOR receives the Grants.gov acknowledgments. The AOR and the PI receive Commons acknowledgments. Information related to the assignment of an application to a Scientific Review Group is also in the Commons.
Note: Since email can be unreliable, it is the responsibility of the applicant to check periodically on their application status in the Commons.
The NIH will not accept any application in response to this FOA that is essentially the same as one currently pending initial merit review unless the applicant withdraws the pending application. The NIH will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one already reviewed. This does not preclude the submission of an application already reviewed with substantial changes, but such application must include an Introduction addressing the previous critique. Note such an application is considered a "resubmission" for the SF424 (R&R).
4. Intergovernmental
This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
5. 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.
A grantee may, at its own risk and without NIH prior approval, incur obligations
and expenditures to cover costs up to 90 days before the beginning date
of the initial budget period of a new or competing renewal (formerly
competing continuation) award if such costs: are necessary to conduct
the project, and would be allowable under the grant, if awarded, without
NIH prior approval. If specific expenditures would otherwise require prior
approval, the grantee must obtain NIH approval before incurring the cost.
NIH prior approval is required for any costs to be incurred more than 90
days before the beginning date of the initial budget period of a new or
competing renewal award.
The incurrence of pre-award costs in anticipation of a competing or non-competing award imposes no obligation on NIH either to make the award or to increase the amount of the approved budget if an award is made for less than the amount anticipated and is inadequate to cover the pre-award costs incurred. NIH expects the grantee to be fully aware that pre-award costs result in borrowing against future support and that such borrowing must not impair the grantee's ability to accomplish the project objectives in the approved time frame or in any way adversely affect the conduct of the project. See the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
6. Other Submission Requirements
PD/PI Credential (e.g., Agency Login)
The NIH requires the PD/PI(s) to fill in his/her Commons User ID in the PROFILE Project Director/Principal Investigator section, Credential log-in field of the Research & Related Senior/Key Person Profile component.
Organizational DUNS
The applicant organization must include its DUNS number in its Organization Profile in the eRA Commons. This DUNS number must match the DUNS number provided at CCR registration with Grants.gov. For additional information, see Frequently Asked Questions Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications.
PHS398 Research Plan Component Sections
Item 3 of the PHS398 Research Plan is limited to 12 pages.
All application instructions outlined in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide are to be followed, incorporating "Just-in-Time" information concepts, and with the following additional requirements:
Special Instructions for Modular Grant applications
R01 applications from U.S. institutions/organizations requesting up to $250,000 per year in direct costs (excluding consortium F&A costs) must be submitted in a modular budget format. Additional information on modular budgets is available at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm.When submitting a modular budget, the applicant organization will include only the PHS398 Modular Budget component.See Section 3.4 of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide for further instructions regarding the use of the PHS398 Modular Budget component.
Foreign organizations may not submit modular budgets. See NOT-OD-06-096.
Special Instructions for Applications Requesting $500,000 (direct costs) or More Per Year
Applicants requesting $500,000
or more in direct costs for any year (excluding consortium F&A costs)
must carry out the following steps:
1) Contact the IC program staff at least 6 weeks before submitting the application, i.e., as you are developing plans for the study;
2) Obtain agreement from the IC staff that the IC will accept your application for consideration for award; and,
3) Include the PHS398 Cover Letter component with the application to identify the staff member and IC who agreed to accept assignment of the application.
This policy applies to all new applications, competing renewal (formerly competing continuation) applications, resubmission (formerly revised/amended) applications, and revision (formerly competing supplemental) applications. See NOT-OD-02-004, October 16, 2001.
NIH has published new limitations on grant application appendix materials to encourage applications to be as concise as possible while containing the information needed for expert scientific review. See https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-07-018.html.
Applicants must follow the specific instructions on Appendix materials as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide (See https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/424/index.htm).
Do not use the Appendix to circumvent the page limitations. An application that does not observe the required page limitations may be delayed in the review process.
Foreign Applications (Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entity)
Plan for Sharing Research Data
The precise content of the
data-sharing plan will vary, depending on the data being collected and
how the investigator is planning to share the data. Applicants who are
planning to share data may wish to describe briefly the expected schedule
for data sharing, the format of the final dataset, the documentation to
be provided, whether or not any analytic tools also will be provided,
whether or not a data-sharing agreement will be required and, if so, a
brief description of such an agreement (including the criteria for deciding
who can receive the data and whether or not any conditions will be placed
on their use), and the mode of data sharing (e.g., under their own auspices
by mailing a disk or posting data on their institutional or personal Web
site, through a data archive or enclave). Investigators choosing to share
under their own auspices may wish to enter into a data-sharing agreement.
References to data sharing may also be appropriate in other sections of
the application.
All applicants must include a plan for sharing research data in their application. The data sharing policy is available at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing. All investigators responding to this funding opportunity should include a description of how final research data will be shared, or explain why data sharing is not possible.
The reasonableness of the data sharing plan or the rationale for not sharing research data will be assessed by the reviewers. However, reviewers will not factor the proposed data sharing plan into the determination of scientific merit or the impact/priority score.
Sharing Research Resources
NIH policy expects that grant recipients make unique research resources readily available for research purposes to qualified individuals within the scientific community after publication (See the NIH Grants Policy Statement https://grants.nih.gov/archive/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/index.htm#_Toc54600131). Investigators responding to this funding opportunity should include a sharing research resources plan addressing how unique research resources will be shared or explain why sharing is not possible.
The adequacy of the resources sharing plan and any related data sharing plans will be considered by Program staff of the funding organization when making recommendations about funding applications. The effectiveness of the resource sharing will be evaluated as part of the administrative review of each Non-Competing Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590). See Section VI.3., Reporting.
Section V. Application Review Information
1. Criteria (Update: Enhanced review criteria have been issued for the evaluation of research applications received for potential FY2010 funding and thereafter - see NOT-OD-09-025).
Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process.
2. Review and Selection Process
Applications submitted for this funding opportunity will be assigned to the ICs on the basis of established PHS referral guidelines.
Appropriate scientific review groups convened in accordance with the standard NIH peer review procedures (http://www.csr.nih.gov/refrev.htm) will evaluate applications for scientific and technical merit.
As part of the initial merit review, all applications will:
Applications submitted in response to this funding opportunity will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:
The goals of NIH supported research are to advance our understanding of biological systems, to improve the control of disease, and to enhance health. In their written critiques, reviewers will be asked to comment on each of the following criteria in order to judge the likelihood that the proposed research will have a substantial impact on the pursuit of these goals. Each of these criteria will be addressed and considered in assigning the overall score, weighting them as appropriate for each application.
Note that an application does not need to be strong
in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact
and thus deserve a high impact/priority score. For example, an investigator may
propose to carry out important work that by its nature is not innovative
but is essential to move a field forward.
Overall Impact. Reviewers will provide an overall impact/priority score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following five core review criteria, and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).
Core Review Criteria. Reviewers will consider each of the five review criteria below in the determination of scientific and technical 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.
Significance: Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
Investigator(s): Are the PD/PIs, collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or New Investigators, 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?
Innovation: 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?
Approach: Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility and will particularly risky aspects be managed?
If the project involves clinical research, are the plans for 1) protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion of minorities and members of both sexes/genders, as well as the inclusion of children, justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?
Environment: 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?
2.A. Additional Review Criteria
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider the following additional items in the determination of scientific and technical merit, but will not give separate scores for these items.
Protections for Human Subjects. For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials.
Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children. When the proposed project involves clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion of minorities and members of both genders, as well as the inclusion of children.
Vertebrate Animals. The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following five points: 1) proposed use of the animals, and species, strains, ages, sex, and numbers to be used; 2) justifications for the use of animals and for the appropriateness of the species and numbers proposed; 3) adequacy of veterinary care; 4) procedures for limiting discomfort, distress, pain and injury to that which is unavoidable in the conduct of scientifically sound research including the use of analgesic, anesthetic, and tranquilizing drugs and/or comfortable restraining devices; and 5) methods of euthanasia and reason for selection if not consistent with the AVMA Guidelines on Euthanasia.
Resubmission Applications. When reviewing a Resubmission application (formerly called an amended application), 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.
Renewal Applications. When reviewing a Renewal application (formerly called a competing continuation application), the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.
Revision Applications. When reviewing a Revision application (formerly called a competing supplement application), 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.
Biohazards. 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.
Additional Review Considerations
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will address each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.
Budget and Period Support. Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.
Select Agents Research. Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1) the Select Agent(s) to be used in the proposed research, 2) the registration status of all entities where Select Agent(s) will be used, 3) the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent(s), and 4) plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent(s).
Applications from Foreign Organizations. Reviewers will assess whether the project presents special opportunities for furthering research programs through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental conditions that exist in other countries and either are not readily available in the United States or augment existing U.S. resources.
Resource Sharing Plans. Reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources, are reasonable: 1) Data Sharing Plan (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing/data_sharing_guidance.htm); 2) Sharing Model Organisms (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-04-042.html); and 3) Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS) (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-07-088.html).
3. Anticipated Announcement
and Award Dates
Not Applicable
Section VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices
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 NIH eRA Commons.
If the application is under
consideration for funding, NIH will request
"just-in-time" information from the applicant. For details, applicants
may refer to the NIH
Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards,
Subpart A: General.
A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award (NoA) will be provided to the applicant organization. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document. Once all administrative and programmatic issues have been resolved, the NoA will be generated via email notification from the awarding component to the grantee business official.
Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk. These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs. See Section IV.5., Funding Restrictions.
2. Administrative
and National Policy Requirements
All NIH grant and cooperative agreement awards include the NIH Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General and Part II: Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms and Conditions for Specific Types of Grants, Grantees, and Activities.
3. Reporting
When multiple years are involved, awardees will be required to submit the Non-Competing Grant Progress Report (PHS 2590) annually and financial statements as required in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
We encourage your inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants. Inquiries may fall into three areas: scientific/research, peer review, and financial or grants management issues:
1. Scientific/Research Contact(s):
Ivn D. Montoya, M.D,
Pharmacotherapies and Medical Consequences of Drug Abuse
National Institute on Drug Abuse
Neuroscience Center, Room 4143
6001 Executive Blvd.
Bethesda, MD 20892
Telephone: (301) 443-8639
Fax: 301-443-2599
Email: email@example.com
2. Peer Review Contact(s):
Not applicable.
3. Financial/Grants Management Contact(s):
Deborah Wertz
Grants Management Specialist
Grants Management Branch
National Institution on Drug Abuse/NIH/DHHS
6101 Executive Blvd., Suite 270
Bethesda, MD 20892-8403
Telephone: (301) 443-6710
Fax: 301-594-6847
Email: firstname.lastname@example.com
Section VIII. Other Information
Required Federal Citations
Vertebrate Animals:
Recipients of PHS support for activities involving live, vertebrate animals must comply with PHS Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/PHSPolicyLabAnimals.pdf) as mandated by the Health Research Extension Act of 1985 (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/hrea1985.htm), and the USDA Animal Welfare Regulations (http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/legislat/usdaleg1.htm) as applicable.
Human Subjects Protection:
Federal regulations (45 CFR 46) require that applications and proposals involving human subjects must be evaluated with reference to the risks to the subjects, the adequacy of protection against these risks, the potential benefits of the research to the subjects and others, and the importance of the knowledge gained or to be gained (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm).
Data and Safety Monitoring Plan:
Data and safety monitoring is required for all types of clinical trials, including physiologic toxicity and dose-finding studies (Phase I); efficacy studies (Phase II); efficacy, effectiveness and comparative trials (Phase III). Monitoring should be commensurate with risk. The establishment of data and safety monitoring boards (DSMBs) is required for multi-site clinical trials involving interventions that entail potential risks to the participants (NIH Policy for Data and Safety Monitoring, NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not98-084.html).
Sharing Research Data:
Investigators submitting an NIH application seeking $500,000 or more in direct costs in any single year are expected to include a plan for data sharing or state why this is not possible (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing).
Investigators should seek guidance from their institutions, on issues related to institutional policies and local IRB rules, as well as local, State and Federal laws and regulations, including the Privacy Rule. Reviewers will consider the data sharing plan but will not factor the plan into the determination of the scientific merit or the impact/priority score.
Access to Research Data through
the Freedom of Information Act:
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110 has been revised to provide access to research data through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) under some circumstances. Data that are (1) first produced in a project that is supported in whole or in part with Federal funds and (2) cited publicly and officially by a Federal agency in support of an action that has the force and effect of law (i.e., a regulation) may be accessed through FOIA. It is important for applicants to understand the basic scope of this amendment. NIH has provided guidance at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/a110/a110_guidance_dec1999.htm. Applicants may wish to place data collected under this funding opportunity in a public archive, which can provide protections for the data and manage the distribution for an indefinite period of time. If so, the application should include a description of the archiving plan in the study design and include information about this in the budget justification section of the application. In addition, applicants should think about how to structure informed consent statements and other human subjects procedures given the potential for wider use of data collected under this award.
Sharing of Model Organisms:
NIH is committed to support efforts that encourage sharing of important research resources including the sharing of model organisms for biomedical research (see https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/model_organism/index.htm). At the same time the NIH recognizes the rights of grantees and contractors to elect and retain title to subject inventions developed with Federal funding pursuant to the Bayh Dole Act (see the NIH Grants Policy Statement. Beginning October 1, 2004, all investigators submitting an NIH application or contract proposal are expected to include in the application/proposal a description of a specific plan for sharing and distributing unique model organism research resources generated using NIH funding or state why such sharing is restricted or not possible. This will permit other researchers to benefit from the resources developed with public funding. The inclusion of a model organism sharing plan is not subject to a cost threshold in any year and is expected to be included in all applications where the development of model organisms is anticipated.
Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children:
It is the policy of the NIH that women and members of minority groups and their sub-populations must be included in all NIH-supported clinical research projects unless a clear and compelling justification is provided indicating that inclusion is inappropriate with respect to the health of the subjects or the purpose of the research. This policy results from the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 (Section 492B of Public Law 103-43). All investigators proposing clinical research should read the "NIH Guidelines for Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical Research (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-001.html); a complete copy of the updated Guidelines is available at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_amended_10_2001.htm. The amended policy incorporates: the use of an NIH definition of clinical research; updated racial and ethnic categories in compliance with the new OMB standards; clarification of language governing NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials consistent with the SF424 (R&R) application; and updated roles and responsibilities of NIH staff and the extramural community. The policy continues to require for all NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials that: a) all applications or proposals and/or protocols must provide a description of plans to conduct analyses, as appropriate, to address differences by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic groups, including subgroups if applicable; and b) investigators must report annual accrual and progress in conducting analyses, as appropriate, by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic group differences.
Inclusion of Children as Participants in Clinical Research:
The NIH maintains a policy that children (i.e., individuals under the age of 21) must be included in all clinical research, conducted or supported by the NIH, unless there are scientific and ethical reasons not to include them.
All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the "NIH Policy and Guidelines" on the inclusion of children as participants in research involving human subjects (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/children/children.htm).
Required Education on the Protection of Human Subject Participants:
NIH policy requires education on the protection of human subject participants for all investigators submitting NIH applications for research involving human subjects and individuals designated as key personnel. The policy is available at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-039.html.
Human Embryonic Stem Cells (hESC):
Criteria for federal funding of research on hESCs can be found at http://stemcells.nih.gov/index.asp and at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-09-116.html. Only research using hESC lines that are registered in the NIH Human Embryonic Stem Cell Registry will be eligible for Federal funding (http://escr.nih.gov/). It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide in the project description and elsewhere in the application as appropriate, the official NIH identifier(s) for the hESC line(s) to be used in the proposed research.
NIH Public Access Policy:
NIH-funded investigators are requested to submit to the NIH manuscript submission (NIHMS) system (http://www.nihms.nih.gov/) at PubMed Central (PMC) an electronic version of the author's final manuscript upon acceptance for publication, resulting from research supported in whole or in part with direct costs from NIH. The author's final manuscript is defined as the final version accepted for journal publication, and includes all modifications from the publishing peer review process.
NIH is requesting that authors submit manuscripts resulting from 1) currently funded NIH research projects or 2) previously supported NIH research projects if they are accepted for publication on or after May 2, 2005. The NIH Public Access Policy applies to all research grant and career development award mechanisms, cooperative agreements, contracts, Institutional and Individual Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards, as well as NIH intramural research studies. The Policy applies to peer-reviewed, original research publications that have been supported in whole or in part with direct costs from NIH, but it does not apply to book chapters, editorials, reviews, or conference proceedings. Publications resulting from non-NIH-supported research projects should not be submitted.
For more information about the Policy or the submission process, please visit the NIH Public Access Policy Web site at http://publicaccess.nih.gov// and view the Policy or other Resources and Tools, including the Authors' Manual.
Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information:
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued final modification to the "Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information", the "Privacy Rule", on August 14, 2002. The Privacy Rule is a federal regulation under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996 that governs the protection of individually identifiable health information, and is administered and enforced by the HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR).
Decisions about applicability and implementation of the Privacy Rule reside with the researcher and his/her institution. The OCR website (http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/) provides information on the Privacy Rule, including a complete Regulation Text and a set of decision tools on "Am I a covered entity?" Information on the impact of the HIPAA Privacy Rule on NIH processes involving the review, funding, and progress monitoring of grants, cooperative agreements, and research contracts can be found at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-025.html.
URLs in NIH Grant Applications or Appendices:
All applications and proposals for NIH funding must be self-contained within specified page limitations. For publications listed in the appendix and/or Progress report, Internet addresses (URLs) or PubMed Central (PMC) submission identification numbers must be used for publicly accessible on-line journal articles.Publicly accessible on-line journal articles or PMC articles/manuscripts accepted for publication that are directly relevant to the project may be included only as URLs or PMC submission identification numbers accompanying the full reference in either the Bibliography & References Cited section, the Progress Report Publication List section, or the Biographical Sketch section of the NIH grant application. A URL or PMC submission identification number citation may be repeated in each of these sections as appropriate. There is no limit to the number of URLs or PMC submission identification numbers that can be cited.
Healthy People 2010:
The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to achieving the health promotion and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2010," a PHS-led national activity for setting priority areas. This FOA is related to one or more of the priority areas. Potential applicants may obtain a copy of "Healthy People 2010" at http://www.health.gov/healthypeople.
Authority and Regulations:
This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance at http://www.cfda.gov/ and is not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health Systems Agency review. Awards are made under the authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
The PHS strongly encourages all grant recipients to provide a smoke-free workplace and discourage the use of all tobacco products. In addition, Public Law 103-227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking in certain facilities (or in some cases, any portion of a facility) in which regular or routine education, library, day care, health care, or early childhood development services are provided to children. This is consistent with the PHS mission to protect and advance the physical and mental health of the American people.
Loan Repayment Programs:
NIH encourages applications for educational loan repayment from qualified health professionals who have made a commitment to pursue a research career involving clinical, pediatric, contraception, infertility, and health disparities related areas. The LRP is an important component of NIH's efforts to recruit and retain the next generation of researchers by providing the means for developing a research career unfettered by the burden of student loan debt. Note that an NIH grant is not required for eligibility and concurrent career award and LRP applications are encouraged. The periods of career award and LRP award may overlap providing the LRP recipient with the required commitment of time and effort, as LRP awardees must commit at least 50% of their time (at least 20 hours per week based on a 40 hour week) for two years to the research. For further information, please see: http://www.lrp.nih.gov/.
Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices
Office of Extramural
Research (OER)
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
9000 Rockville Pike
Bethesda, Maryland 20892
Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS)
Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files.


text:
START Conference Manager
A Tale of Two DRM: The Co-Construction of Access and Use Rights for Licensed Digital Resources
Kristin Eschenfelder and Barbara Walden
ASIS&T 2008 Annual Meeting (AM08 2008)
Columbus, Ohio, October 24-29, 2008
This paper explores the process by which use rights for licensed digital resources are co-constructed between owners and users of intellectual property through a longitudinal social process. It describes this co-construction process for the development of digital rights management technologies on two digital scholarly resources the Society for Automotive Engineers (SAE) Digital Library and ARTstor. The ARTstor DRM development process can be seen as the best of times where the vendor actively sought stakeholder input and engaged in user testing. In contrast, the SAE DRM development process can be seen as the worst of times where the publisher imposed a DRM on a user group with no input and no user testing. While in both cases the DRM were reconfigured after initial user reactions, the reconfiguration in the ARTstor case was relatively managed and positive in tone, and the reconfiguration in the SAE case was chaotic and openly hostile. Differences in the co-construction of the DRM can be explained in part by differences in publisher attitudes toward academic libraries as customers, difference in the publishers traditional business models, and differences in ownership of the content within the two digital libraries.
Conference Manager (V2.54.6)

subset: commoncrawl


text:
In 4th Judicial District Court Thursday, 42-year-old Thomas Wyman was sentenced. Wyman had changed his plea to Guilty on several counts in 4th Judicial District Court in November. Per a plea agreement with the State, one of the seven counts was dismissed and two were amended to misdemeanor status.
On Counts 1, 2 and 3, Delivery of a Controlled Substance – Marijuana – to a Minor, Wyman was sentenced to 3 to 5 years, suspended, in lieu of a 90-day split jail sentence. The three counts are to run concurrently. He was also sentenced to five years supervised probation.
On Counts 4 and 5, Misdemeanor Child Endangerment, Wyman was sentenced to 180 days in jail, running concurrently to each other and with Counts 1 through 3, suspended, with all but 90 days in jail to run concurrently to Counts 1 through 3.
On Count 6, Misdemeanor Possession, Wyman was sentenced to 180 days, suspended with all but 90 days in jail to run concurrently to all other counts, along with five years supervised probation.
Per the plea agreement, Count 7, Cultivating Marijuana, was dismissed.
Judge Fenn reluctantly allowed Wyman's 90-day sentence to be approved for work release, as he is the only certified mechanic at Fremont Motors who can work on any of the recalled Toyota cars. With his employer and customers in mind, Judge Fenn told Wyman's attorney, Ryan Healy, he'd allow it, but it would be up to Sheriff Hofmeier to approve the work release. To Wyman, Judge Fenn said, "Don't prove me wrong."
Wyman admitted that what he'd done was incredibly stupid and wrong. He told the court, "I let a lot of people down – my family, my employer and the community and I'm very sorry."
Wyman has been clean for the past 18 months, and his daughters, who'd also been using marijuana, are both clean.


text:
Your restaurant may be Googling you, so be sure to disclose your wine preference in your online profiles.
A report on food blog GrubStreet, part of New York Magazine, stated at least one maitre d' at a chi-chi Manhattan restaurant routinely does Google searches of his patrons. It's not done in an NSA spying kind of way, but a customer-service kind of way.
At 3:30 p.m., in the back office of Eleven Madison Park, maître d' Justin Roller is Googling the names of every guest who will come in that night. It's a well-known tactic of the restaurant, an effort to be as familiar as possible with the diners. Anyone can Google some names and faces, but Roller is going deeper. "I'm looking for chef's whites and wine glasses," he says. A shot of a guest wearing whites means a chef is probably coming to dinner. Wine glasses signify a potential sommelier (or at least a wine geek). If, for example, Roller discovers it's a couple's anniversary, he'll then try to figure out which anniversary. If it's a birthday, he'll welcome a guest, as they walk in the door, with a "Happy Birthday."
For Roller, this is merely part of the unforgettable experience he hopes to give to customers. He also tries to pair servers with those from out-of-state or similar interests. The training in the restaurant is extreme -- including a 97-page training booklet -- but the training is supposed to "disarm customers with their graciousness and care," rather than creepily spy on them.
In the end, customers will be surprised at how well the maitre d' and servers seemed anticipate their needs -- not quite knowing how much their online information may have played a part.


text:
Jose Mendoza played a huge part in defeating highly-fancied Spain at St James' Park on Sunday, as Honduras produced the biggest shock of the second round of group matches at the Men's Olympic Football Tournament.
Seemingly unbeatable, Los Catrachos' goalkeeper was instrumental in eliminating the Spaniards from London 2012, pulling off numerous fine saves to preserve the 1-0 lead acquired by Jerry Bengtson's early opener.
"Every time I set foot on the pitch, it's to put in the performance of my life," Mendoza told FIFA.com outside a joyous dressing room. The determination and intensity in his voice are a reflection of the Central Americans' strong display against one of the favourites to win the competition.
"There's no doubt that beating the world's top footballing nation is a very special result for us. Our performance was excellent, and we fought for every blade of grass. It's a tremendous time to be part of this team," he continued.
In terms of the head-to-head history between the two countries, the result represented a breakthrough for Honduras, even though the CONCACAF nation had caused an upset versus La Roja in the past, drawing 1-1 with the hosts in their opening match of the 1982 FIFA World Cup Spain™.
Mendoza makes no attempt to hide his delight at the outcome of the encounter. "Of course it wasn't the same Spain team that won the World Cup, but we still managed to beat a great side with world-class players. I'm so proud of my team – everyone did their job brilliantly," said the Honduran shot-stopper.
Although he produced some top-drawer saves during the game, negating countless Spanish attacks, the keeper, who plays his club football for Honduran top-flight outfit Platense, is keen for the praise to be shared among the team.
"I had a good match, as did all my team-mates. We're got a group of real battlers, and we were extremely determined going in for challenges. We were able to hold on to our lead by defending as a unit. We were solid, and hungry for the win," he explained.
In what is the country's third appearance at this level, Honduras' Olympic team have already equalled the number of points amassed in their previous best-ever performance, which came at Sydney 2000. But Mendoza is at pains to point out that he and his team-mates have no intention of resting on their laurels.
"We've not qualified for the next round yet, but we've got four points and three goals already in the bag," he said. Their first two goals enabled the Hondurans to claim a point against a Morocco side that had dominated the majority of the match. "We've been good at taking our chances so far, and I hope that we can come up with even more goals as the tournament continues," he added.
La Bicolor are ideally placed to continue their march towards a historic quarter-final appearance. Lying second in Group D with four points, they face pool leaders Japan – already qualified for the last eight with six points – on Wednesday 1 August. A draw will suffice for Honduras, and even a defeat would still see them advance should the Moroccans fail to beat Spain.
Mendoza is not particularly interested in getting bogged down in possible permutations, however. "Japan have been impressive so far," stated the 23-year-old custodian. "They're very well organised and on a good run of form. It's going to be a difficult match, but we'll go looking for a win to ensure our qualification."
As for what might follow, the Honduras No1 makes it clear that his team's ambition knows no bounds: "We're here to win a medal; if possible, the gold."


text:
Search this site
Our Programs
Email Brian
3/9: If you have reviews on Zillow..
4/10 ~ Important..
4/12 ~ FHA Loan Calculator
4/13 ~ Please welcome Tracey Jagielski to our office..
7 Tips for Getting More Responses to Your Emails..
Amending the residential property disclosure after it has been completed..
America's Preferred Home Warranty cost..
APHW has updated their warranty with additional options and price increases..
Appointment of Agent form..
Be careful..
Big Brother MLS is looking out for us again..
Blank addendum & contingency removal documents..
Brian Buffini Peak Producers class offered by HomeSmart..
Brian Buffini's Bold Predictions broadcast.. after meeting Tuesday Live at Noon..
Brokerage license number required on new closing disclosure statement..
Buyer / Seller Letters..
Buyer Broker Compensation field in MLS..
Buying a computer?
Can you change that contract?
Changing your listing to Pending in CSS | Handy when listing goes under contract on weekend..
Clarity on our company name..
Consumer guides & home warranty data collection forms..
Contingency removal (updated)
Contract questions increase as Ohio housing market heats up..
Cooperating compensation..
Couple things..
Craigslist Scams..
Cyber fraud in Ohio on the rise -- How to protect your clients and yourself!
Data Collection Form..
Description errors when new listings are inputted..
Dialing in our paperless system among other things..
Division form now available to register nicknames, initials and maiden names..
Do email and text messages need to be part of your transaction file?
Document requests..
Document review / missing documents..
Docusign Envelope ID's have been removed..
Drone photos..
Earnest money..
Effective Dec. 1, 2018 the 72 Hour Rule will change to a 48 Hour Rule again for the MLS..
Emailing Docs & Notes from Transactions in Paperless Pipeline..
Facebook Business Page..
Fed raises rates..
Fee for services | When other agents handle work for you..
FHA Loan Limit..
Final draft of new contract..
Five ways to lose your license over earnest money..
Forwarding emails or texts from our client to the agent on other side..
Front desk staffing..
Good news for Good Funds law..
Holiday office closed..
Holiday office hours..
Home Inspector Licensing effective 4-4-19 (how it affects us)..
HomeSmart Technology Update..
House Bill 532 has passed..
How to send a review request to your client from Zillow..
I received the letter below from the ODRE..
If you have a domain name pointing to your website..
If you run in to agents interested in learning more about us..
IMPORTANT! New purchase contract and home warranty with fee increase now in service..
Important.. Back to back transactions..
Important.. Repair requests after inspection..
Important.. When do we need warranty/waiver?
Just Listed/Just Sold Postcards..
Keeping you in the know..
Lakewood has had a ban against pit bulls & canary dogs since 2008..
Latest OAR eConnections newsletter..
Legally speaking: Can I write a purchase contract for parties involved in a FSBO transaction?
Limited Service Listing Company..
Listing contract date..
Listing documentation has been updated to include new warranty and..
Listing extensions & price changes..
Listing vacant homes..
Lorri letters..
Marketing/Syndication tab of our website..
Meeting note..
Message with attachments sent to front desk..
Messages from Paperless Pipeline..
MLS initiates Coming Soon..
MLS now provides for 1,500 characters in description..
MLS Training, Docusign template fix (lead based paint form) & update to policies & procedures..
Neat article about listing description..
Need your help..
New addition..
New Agency Disclosure
New ethical duty to provide written confirmation that offer was presented..
New license law requirement | If you advertise your name differently than it appears on your license
New license law rule requirements effective Feb. 10..
New MLS Office number..
New Notice of sale..
New Training tab at our website..
OAR Newletter week of March 13th..
OAR Newsletter..
OAR Newsletter..
Office update (my apologies for lengthiness but hope you will read in it's entirety)..
Office update..
Office Updates..
Office Website
OHFA Launches New Product to Reduce Out-of-Pocket Expenses for Homebuyers..
Our new office address is:
Our next office meeting will be on Tuesday, February 5th @ 10:00am..
Our next Office Meeting will be on Tuesday, September 4th at 9:30am (please notice start time)..
Our next office meeting..
Paperless Pipeline Basics (3 minute video)
Pearl Anniversary
Please do this in your Docusign account..
Please welcome Debbie Albrecht (pronounced all-bright) to HTFP!
Please welcome Judy Langel to HTFP..
Point of Sale - Cuyahoga County
Points to ponder when writing listings descriptions..
Policies & Procedures..
Power of Attorney..
Pre-completed agency disclosure attached to listing by listing agent..
Prepare for changes coming in August..
Real Estate & Professional Licensing Spring 2018 Newsletter
Recommending inspectors..
Redfin listing offer and..
Releases for purchases & listings..
REMINDER: MLS training at office this Monday, 9/10 at 1:30PM..
Rental Listings..
REO Properties: Are lenders exempt when it comes to disclosure?
Residential property disclosure form..
Seller occupying after closing..
Setting up your website..
Shopping offers: So is it...illegal? Unethical? Or is it just not right??
Smart Listing..
Something I plan to try that I thought might be of interest to some of you..
Staying in touch with clients..
Tech help..
Terry Crist reminded me about RPR | You can set up and access this from the first MLS login screen
The 48 Hour Rule is back effective 12/1/18 (evidently 72 hours was too much)!
The bad practice of changing pages on an accepted contract..
The most common license law violations recently reported..
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act..
The up and coming Truth in Lending 3 day rule..
Thoughts on classes, training, CE's & the like..
TILA-RESPA to be enacted on October 3rd, 2015
TILA/Settlement changes in August..
Tip for Data Collection Form..
Title Company Addresses
Too make it a little easier..
Topic from our meeting | Please take 3 minutes to watch..
Training videos, service additions & our websites..
VA appraisals..
VA financing on our listings..
Video and audio home surveillance and listed property..
Video from Peg Ritenour of OAR on Multiple Offers..
We need your help..
We've added another Pro to our line up..!
When client is an entity..
When working with buyers..
When working with two or more buyer clients on same house..
Why people buy?
Yard signs & riders..
Zillow / Trulia syndication..
Access Codes
Additional Services
Agent selling their own property
Best practices when representing the Seller in multiple offers
C.M.A. Instruction (quick reference)
Comp Only Listing Instructions
Contemporaneous Offers Notice
Descriptive Adjectives
Descriptive Adjectives
Docu-Sign Instructions
E-mail Disclaimer
Earnest Money Policy
Email Disclaimer
Email to Fax Service
Email to Fax Service
Fair Housing Reference Sheet
HUD Registration
Multiple Offers
Opcity referral fee address
Phone Instructions
Schedule showing for agent in ST
Syndication Schedule
Title Company Addresses
Utility Companies By City
Utility Companies by City
Comp Only Listing Instructions
Top Flight Professionals
Report Abuse
Powered By
Google Sites


text:
Teacher resources and professional development across the curriculum
Teacher professional development and classroom resources across the curriculum
2: Person to Person
Before You Watch
To begin this workshop session, you will tap your prior knowledge and experience and then read current research on interpersonal communication.
Reflect on Your ExperienceConsider the types of conversations that you have led or observed among students in your classroom, then answer the following questions. You may want to save your answers in order to reflect on them again at the end of the session.
Examine the ResearchRead the article listed below, then answer the following questions.
Article"Classroom Discourse"
Part 1 (PDF, 524 K) | Part 2 (PDF, 579 K) | Part 3 (PDF, 506 K)
This article addresses the important role of teacher-student and student-student interactions in the creation of a community of learners and in shaping students' development in the target language.
Hall, Joan Kelly. "Classroom Discourse." In Methods of Teaching Foreign Languages: Creating a Community of Learners in the Classroom, 77-100. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice-Hall, 2001.
Reading Questions
Optional Articles
You may elect to read the following two articles for a deeper understanding of the research cited in "Classroom Discourse" and to learn about additional classroom examples that support the research.
"'Aw, man, where you goin'?'"
Part 1 (PDF, 757 K) | Part 2 (PDF, 764 K)
This article looks at foreign language education from a sociocultural perspective.
Hall, Joan Kelly. "'Aw, man, where you goin'?': Classroom Interaction and the Development of L2 Interactional Competence." Issues in Applied Linguistics 6, no. 2 (1995): 37-61.
"Teacher-Student Interaction and Language Learning"
Part 1 (PDF, 397 K) | Part 2 (PDF, 406 K) | Part 3 (PDF, 365 K)
This article reviews literature on recent developments in teacher-student interaction and language learning.
Hall, Joan Kelly, and Megan Walsh. "Teacher-Student Interaction and Language Learning." Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 22 (2002): 186-203.
Next > Analyze the Video
|2: Person to Person >
Introduction | Before You Watch | Analyze the Video
Examine the Topic | Put It Into Practice | Action Research Project | Reflect on Your Learning
Resources | Library Videos Chart | Printouts | Assignments
Foreign Languages Workshop Home | © | About This Workshop | Glossary | Site Map
© Annenberg Foundation 2017. All rights reserved. Legal Policy


text:
The Shepherd's Carol
Mary, Mary, hush, see the Child.
Joseph, Joseph, look, see how mild!
This is Jesus, King of the Jews,
Savior to me and a Savior to you.
Text: Dan Carter
Music: Dan Carter
Artist: Carter
Album: Music Published in the Church Magazines: Friend
Composition Date: 1981-12-01
More Info: Friend


text:
Holder pledges nationwide IRS probe, analysis of AP flap
Attorney General Eric Holder says because he was recused from the AP phone record subpoenas, he is "not familiar with them." VPC
WASHINGTON — Attorney General Eric Holder told a congressional panel that the Justice Department's criminal inquiry into the IRS will be national in scope and warned that officials would be held accountable if laws were broken.
In a sometimes-contentious House Judiciary Committee hearing that also examined the Justice Department's secret seizure of Associated Press communications in a leak investigation and the handling of the Boston Marathon bombing inquiry, Holder said authorities would be reviewing a range of possible violations in connection with disclosures that IRS workers gave closer scrutiny to conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status.
MORE: Holder recused himself from AP probe
MORE: IRS approved liberal groups while Tea Party in limbo
"There are potential civil rights law (and) false statement violations,'' Holder said, outlining the likely avenues of investigative review.
Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, whose congressional district includes Cincinnati where the IRS' questionable activities are believed to have started, asked whether the agency's actions were confined only to that office.
"I simply don't know,'' Holder said. "We've only begun our investigation. … We will be appropriately aggressive and let the facts take us where they may.''
Venting frustration with a series of scandals shadowing the Obama administration, including the IRS disclosures and the AP seizures, both Republican and Democratic members of the sharply divided panel expressed rare unity in their rebuke of the IRS.
"Targeting private citizens based on their political views — whether on the left or the right — has absolutely no place in our government,'' said Michigan Rep. John Conyers, the panel's ranking Democrat.
Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, called the IRS' activities a "threat to our democracy,'' while Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., said the discriminatory IRS activities were "chilling.''
"This is the big one,'' Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said. "People's First Amendment rights are being violated.''
Jordan went further, accusing Lois Lerner, director of the IRS' Exempt Status Division, of being untruthful in past congressional communications and asked that the criminal inquiry not interfere with planned congressional investigations of the agency.
"We will try to investigate in such a way that it doesn't impede'' congressional inquiries, Holder said.
Holder also faced pointed questions about the Justice Department's decision to seize communications involving 20 reporters and editors of the AP over a period of two months related to leaks of classified information about the organization's reports last year about a foiled terrorist plot.
The attorney general, who recused himself from the inquiry soon after it was launched last year, pledged to launch an "after-action analysis'' of the department's decision but only after the probe was completed.
"It seems to me that the damage to a free press has been substantial,'' said Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., referring to the department's action.
Holder said the decision to subpoena the records was made by Deputy Attorney General Jim Cole, after the attorney general had recused himself. Holder said he removed himself because he had access to the information that is the subject of the leak investigation. He also acknowledged Wednesday that his own telephone records had been reviewed as part of the federal leak investigation.
"I am a fact witness,'' Holder said, adding that other members of the Justice Department's National Security Division have been recused from the inquiry. "I was a possessor of the information.''
The tone of the hearing turned particularly bitter during discussion of an unrelated issue when Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., accused the Justice Department of withholding information related to a separate congressional hearing involving Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez, the Obama administration's current nominee to head the Department of Labor.
Holder called Issa's characterizations "unacceptable and shameful.''


text:
Hanahan, South Carolina Social Security Disability Lawyers
Michael Jordan
Goose Creek, SC 29445
Florida Coastal School of Law
Michael was drawn to the Steinberg Law Firm because of its long history, dedication to helping injured workers and strong reputation in personal injury trials. He especially recognized the importance of the firm's reputation for delivering proven results for the injured people of South Carolina.
For three...
David Pearlman
University of South Carolina School of Law and The George Washington University Law School
While in college at University of Georgia and George Washington University, David marched for civil and workers' rights. After obtaining his law degree from the University Of South Carolina...
Steven E. Goldberg
University of South Carolina School of Law
While practicing law for over 25 years, Steven has represented clients with on the job injuries and automobile wrecks. He has had successful trial appearances as well as settlements totaling over several million dollars. Over the past...
Catherine D. Meehan
Goose Creek, SC 29445
Charleston School of Law
Kevin Holmes
Rutgers School of Law-Newark
Heather Westerfield
Suite 105
Charleston, SC 29406
New England Law | Boston
Ben Akery
Emory University School of Law
Ben joined the venerable Steinberg Law Firm, which was founded in the 1920s on the principle that injured workers deserved representation against forces bigger than themselves. At Steinberg, he is concentrating on personal injury, workers' compensation, and social security disability cases.
Ben earned his undergraduate degree...
Caroline Temple
Charleston, SC 29406
Paul M. Hebert Law Center, Louisiana State University
Katherine Lohr
North Charleston, SC 29419
W. Trey Merck
Suite 180-A
Charleston, SC 29407
University of South Carolina - Columbia
Marie Lowery
Suite 250
Charleston, SC 29492
Charleston School of Law
James C. Sproat Esq.
University of Cincinnati College of Law
C. Logan Rollins
College of Charleston
John David Hawkins
University of South Carolina School of Law
Randy Taylor
University of South Carolina School of Law
Conrad Falkiewicz
Charleston, SC 29407
John Shoop Esq
Charleston, SC 29492
James Chellis
Summerville, SC 29483
Pete Strom
Columbia, SC 29204
University of South Carolina School of Law
Murrells Inlet, SC 29576
Social Security Disability, Elder, Personal Injury and Workers' Comp
University of South Carolina - Beaufort
Mildred Rita Metts
Columbia, SC 29201
University of South Carolina School of Law
Bert Louthian
1116 Blanding Street
Columbia, SC 29201
University of South Carolina School of Law
Tiana Hinnant
North Myrtle Beach, SC 29582
Barbara Sullivan Cooper
Columbia, SC 29201
University of South Carolina School of Law
Suzanne H. Jebaily
University of South Carolina School of Law
Ronald J. Jebaily
University of South Carolina School of Law and St. John's University School of Law
Rangeley B. Chewning
University of South Carolina School of Law
George D. Jebaily
University of South Carolina School of Law and University of South Carolina School of Law
Mario Anthony Pacella
Columbia, SC 29204
Karen Luchka Gieselman
Columbia, SC 29201
Geoffrey Miles Gordon
Conway, SC 29526
Charles Vance Leonard
Myrtle Beach, SC 29577
Charles Speth
Columbia, SC 29201
Joe Michael Crosby
Georgetown, SC 29440
Shelly Bezanson Kelly
Columbia, SC 29201
Thomas Faro Ventimiglia
Hilton Head Island, SC 29926
Jill Wright Fennel
Myrtle Beach, SC 29572
Wesley Stoddard
Spartanburg, SC 29306
University of South Carolina School of Law
Hal Roach
Suite 1
Greenville, SC 29601
University of Kentucky College of Law
Patrick Eugene Knie Esq.
Spartanburg, SC 29306
University of South Carolina School of Law
I do not represent any insurance companies or corporations.
I like the challenge of fighting big companies for my clients.
Having tried hundreds of cases, I am more than willing to take your case in front of a jury. I find that representing injured people is very rewarding. I receive thank you noted,...
Social Security Disability Lawyers in Nearby Cities
Social Security Disability Lawyers in Nearby Counties
Related Practice Areas
Need a lawyer?
The Justia Lawyer Directory is a listing of lawyers, legal aid organizations, and pro bono legal service organizations. Whether you were injured, are accused of a crime, or are merely engaging in everyday affairs that affect your legal rights or property, an attorney can help you resolve problems or prevent new ones from arising.
Here are just a few situations where you might want to seek the advice of an attorney:
- You were injured in a car or truck accident
- You have been arrested and charged with a crime, such as DUI or shoplifting
- You are considering separating from your spouse
- You have been subjected to harassment or other discrimination at work
Use Justia to research and compare Hanahan attorneys so that you can make an informed decision when you hire your counsel.
It is important to research an attorney before hiring him or her. Be sure to evaluate an attorney's experience (types of cases handled, prior results obtained, etc.). Although prior results are not indicative of the likelihood of success in your case, they can help you make an informed decision.
Also worth serious consideration is the attorney's location, particularly if you will be traveling to visit him or her for consultations.
Finally, research an attorney to see whether he or she has ever been subject to discipline. Although disciplinary actions do not necessarily impact the attorney's competence to handle your case, they may affect your decision whether to hire.
Researching Attorney Discipline


text:
Shovel your sidewalk
With the almost-balmy weather moving in, we might get lulled into thinking we've seen the last of snow for this part of 2014.
I suspect I could be in a small minority of people who will be sorry to see it go. Count me in the camp that believes the best springs come after the worst winters.
Before this current thaw is over, though, there is still time left for people to scold those who don't shovel. I'm sure everyone knows some shoveling slackers.
The problem is most obvious in cities, where a cleared sidewalk is crucial after a big snow.
In many places, shoveling scofflaws are subject to fines. More important, it's a mark of good citizenship, making sure pedestrians can travel safely past your property.
After this year's snowy winter, a new proposal surfaced in New York City to not only fine property owners who don't shovel, but also to do it for them and then bill them.
This mandatory shoveling program might work well in New London. The current system is not working. Actually, there is no system in New London.
A spokesperson for the mayor told me this week they stopped writing tickets for not shoveling snow about two years ago, because of the diminished police patrol strength. The city shoveling ordinance calls for fines up to $100.
You don't have to go far on the main streets of downtown New London to find a lot of unshoveled sidewalks.
One of the biggest offenders is the city itself, leaving a long stretch of Eugene O'Neill Drive, what was once Main Street, with unshoveled sidewalks. Curiously, it is the stretch of sidewalk along the municipal parking lots, where the city directs you to park when it snows.
The mayor's spokesperson told me they have been behind on shoveling because one of two public works sidewalk plows has been broken since January and they have focused instead on sidewalks around parks and schools.
I don't have the expertise needed to be a public works director, but if I did I might decide that, on snow days when schools are closed, you might concentrate on downtown sidewalks.
The city sets a bad example, but there are plenty of others.
I am surprised to see unshoveled sidewalks in front of businesses, bars especially, like the State Street Saloon and The Exchange Bar & Grill on Bank Street.
The sidewalk has been nicely shoveled this winter in front of Hanafin's Irish Pub on State Street, but not in front of the empty building at 18 Bank St. owned by the same people. The blighted Bank Street building has had a treacherous sheet of ice across its sidewalk most of the winter.
Another big offender, strangely enough, is the U.S. Postal Service, which cleans the sidewalk out front but not the one running along the side of its building.
AT&T, too, has shamefully ignored the sidewalks in front of its State Street building, after emptying it of workers last year. Sadly, the sidewalks in front of the First Congregational Church on State Street remained snow covered.
Maybe if AT&T were to send a crew they could do the church, too.
I know the proposal in New York, to shovel walks and bill the property owners would be problematic here, since the city isn't doing some of its own shoveling.
But maybe if a plan were in place, the city could designate a contractor who would be paid by the property owners, with the city as the enforcement authority.
I would bet the first time someone gets a lien on their property for an expensive shoveling, they probably won't get a second.
Unshoveled sidewalks may not seem like much of a priority at City Hall, where it has been hard to see beyond the steam leak this winter.
But you can't have a vibrant downtown if people can't safely walk around it.
This is the opinion of David Collins.
Stories that may interest you
Stormy Daniels keeps her clothes on at Mohegan Sun
The porn star turned stand-up comic roasted President Donald Trump in a gig Wednesday at Comix Roadhouse.
GOP leaders want special session to correct 'badly written' meal tax law