text:
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: Drug
Abuse, Risky Decision Making and HIV/AIDS (R21)
Announcement Type
Update: The following update relating to this announcement has 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: PAS-07-325
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number(s)
Key Dates
Release/Posted Date: February 2, 2007
Opening Date: February 2, 2007(Earliest date an application may be submitted to Grants.gov)
Letters of Intent Receipt Date(s): Not required.
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 http://grants1.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
Additional Information To Be Available Date (URL Activation Date): Not Applicable
Expiration Date: January 3, 2010 (now January 8, 2010 per NOT-OD-07-093)
Due Dates for E.O. 12372
Not Applicable
Overview Content
Executive Summary
Table of Contents
Part I Overview
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 Contact(s)
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
Drug abuse increases the risk of both contracting and transmitting HIV/AIDS. Although it is well known that injection drug use increases the risk of HIV through sharing of contaminated needles, drugs of abuse and addictive behaviors also may increase risk of HIV transmission by affecting decisions to engage in risky sexual behavior. Despite a wealth of anecdotal reports and limited empirical data, there still remains much to be learned about the cognitive, behavioral, emotional and situational processes that mediate interactions between drug abuse, risky decision making and HIV/AIDS and their associated neurobiological substrates.
Research on behavioral, cognitive and neurobiological mechanisms, including studies of interactions between these varied influences, can enhance our understanding of a role for drug abuse and addiction in decision-making processes that contribute to HIV transmission through risky sexual behavior. While progress has been made in identifying risk factors that increase the possibility of HIV transmission, little is known about decision making processes that ultimately lead to risky sexual behavior. For example, we know that unprotected sex and multiple partners are risk factors for HIV transmission, but we have little understanding of the cognitive, emotional or social processes that lead to decisions to engage in these high risk behaviors, or how acute and chronic exposure to drugs of abuse may affect these processes. Thus, studies are needed to determine the influence of drug use, withdrawal, craving and relapse on decisions to engage in risky sexual behaviors. Research supported by this announcement might also evaluate how patterns of drug use affect these decisions as well.
Prior research has shown that individuals addicted to drugs of abuse make decisions that favor immediate, smaller rewards over later, larger rewards, and in some instances, may be insensitive to the negative consequences of their actions. Findings from neurobiological studies in substance abusers implicate disruptions in key neuroanatomical circuits that are involved in executive function, emotional processing and emotional behavior. Experimental observations also suggest that drug abuse affects the way in which individuals monitor or use emotions to guide decisions involving risk. Moreover, other evidence indicates that environmental stimuli associated with drugs of abuse take on potent rewarding properties capable of driving subsequent motivated behavior. Hence, conditioned cues may be responsible for triggering compulsive drug taking behavior and involve circuits that subserve emotional memory. It also appears that central dopaminergic systems, which are activated by drugs of abuse, act to amplify the valuation of natural rewards in the environment. Thus, further characterization of these phenomena, in relation to decisions to engage in risky sexual behavior, would be of interest.
Research is also needed to explore the roles that executive functions, learning, memory and emotions play in decisions about sexual behavior under conditions of uncertainty and risk; and to better understand how once a decision is made, it is later evaluated and used to guide and enact future choices and behaviors. Furthermore, exposure to drugs of abuse, HIV infection, or AIDS and its progression may also affect judgment and impulse control, thus compromising the ability to refrain from high risk behaviors. Addiction and the effects of drug withdrawal are associated with altered perceptions, expectancies, and capacities to control impulses and behavior. Moreover, HIV infection and AIDS have been linked to progressive decrements in neurocognitive function, suggesting that both drug abuse and HIV/AIDS may influence self-constraint and regulation. Research focusing on the self-regulation of emotion and how drugs of abuse affect self-regulation under conditions of sexual arousal would be particularly valuable. Studies that probe the neurobiological mechanisms involved in these cognitive processes are critically important as well.
Despite what is known about global factors that may affect judgment and decision making, it is unclear why individuals with different histories, or the same individual in different situations, might make different decisions about sexual risk behavior. Research, therefore, is needed to study how interactions between individual differences and environmental or social variables influence decisions to engage in sexual risk behavior and how an individual's evaluation of past decisions guides future choices and behaviors. Studies focusing on individual differences might examine age (especially with adolescent populations), gender, allostatic load, drug abuse status and history, past sexual behavior, and psychiatric or treatment status (e.g., co-morbid psychiatric disorders, treatment for drug addiction or HIV/AIDS). A basic understanding of individual variation in decision making and decision evaluation in high risk situations will suggest approaches for preventing high risk sexual behavior to reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS.
Experimental designs with human subjects, that are laboratory-based or use remote monitoring in naturalistic settings, will be supported. These approaches should be integrated whenever possible. The proposed research should focus on either (1) drug effects on the processes and mechanisms of decisions that lead to high risk sexual behavior, or (2) effects of environmental or individual variables that influence sexual decision-making in drug abusers. When appropriate, model-driven research should be conducted; thus investigators should use experimental approaches intended to test the operation of specific processes through systematic use of control conditions to rule out alternative interpretations. Studies that include analysis of age, gender and other categorical variables within these experimental designs are also appropriate.
Applicants are encouraged to draw upon recent advances in behavioral- and neuro-economics, social neuroscience and the science of judgment and decision-making in generating hypotheses. Computational models might be developed that can account for complex interactions between emotion, attention and other cognitive factors that influence decisions about risky behavior. Investigators might also consider analogue methods of experimentally studying drug use and sexual risk such as policy capturing techniques, experimental induction of mood states, or computer simulations of conditions that pose risk. In addition, application of conceptual models and research paradigms from other areas of judgment and decision making research may be useful for understanding how decisions about drug use and sexual risk behavior are similar to, or different from, other kinds of complex social decisions.
Applications responsive to this Program Announcement should focus on determining how individual, experiential, neurobiological or environmental variables 1) that influence, 2) are induced by, or 3) are otherwise associated with, acute or chronic exposure to drugs of abuse, affect decision making that leads to high risk sexual behavior. To be responsive to this announcement, prospective investigators must employ experimental approaches that include measurement or manipulation of decisions to engage in, or refrain from, risky sexual behavior in the design of their investigations. The study of decisions to engage in risky sexual behavior must be clearly the central focus of the proposed research. Research may be conducted in populations at elevated risk of HIV acquisition or in people currently living with HIV/AIDS. Study designs that can evaluate health disparities, as well as age, gender and race/ethnicity differences and/or evaluate processes and effects within a developmental context are especially encouraged. Investigators conducting research on the natural history and epidemiology, prevention or services and treatment aspects of drug abuse and HIV/AIDS should refer to the most recent version of NIDA's general Program Announcement on Drug Abuse Aspects of HIV/AIDS (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-04-007.html) or the announcement requesting applications on Non-Injection Drug Abuse and HIV/AIDS (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAS-07-115.html) if appropriate.
Following is a list of research questions that would be appropriate for this announcement, although it is not intended to include all possible topics:
Special Considerations
HIV/AIDS Counseling and Testing Policy for the National Institute on Drug Abuse: Researchers funded by NIDA who are conducting research in community outreach settings, clinical, hospital settings, or clinical laboratories and have ongoing contact with clients at risk for HIV infection, are strongly encouraged to provide HIV risk reduction education and counseling. HIV counseling should include offering HIV testing available on-site or by referral to other HIV testing service for persons at risk for HIV infection including injecting drug users, crack cocaine users, and sexually active drug users and their sexual partners. For more information see https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-DA-01-001.html.
National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse Recommended
Guidelines for the Administration of Drugs to Human Subjects: The National
Advisory Council on Drug Abuse recognizes the importance of research involving
the administration of drugs to human subjects and has developed guidelines
relevant to such research. Potential applicants are encouraged to obtain and
review these recommendations of Council before submitting an application that proposes
research to administer compounds to human subjects. The guidelines are
available on NIDA's Home Page at www.nida.nih.gov under the Funding, or may be obtained by calling (301) 443-2755.
See Section VIII, Other Information - Required Federal Citations, for policies related to this announcement.
Mechanism of Support
This FOA will use the NIH Exploratory/Developmental Research Grant (R21) award mechanism. As an applicant, you will be solely responsible for planning, directing, and executing the proposed project. See https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-06-181.html for the NIH R21 for the Parent Announcement.
The evolution and vitality of the biomedical sciences require a constant infusion of new ideas, techniques, and points of view. These may differ substantially from current thinking or practice and may not yet be supported by substantial preliminary data. By using the R21 mechanism, the NIH seeks to foster the introduction of novel scientific ideas, model systems, tools, agents, targets, and technologies that have the potential to substantially advance biomedical research.
The R21 mechanism is intended to encourage new exploratory and developmental research projects. For example, such projects could assess the feasibility of a novel area of investigation or a new experimental system that has the potential to enhance health-related research. Another example could include the unique and innovative use of an existing methodology to explore a new scientific area. These studies may involve considerable risk but may lead to a breakthrough in a particular area, or to the development of novel techniques, agents, methodologies, models, or applications that could have a major impact on a field of biomedical, behavioral, or clinical research.
Applications for R21 awards should describe projects distinct from those supported through the traditional R01 mechanism. For example, long-term projects, or projects designed to increase knowledge in a well-established area, will not be considered for R21 awards. Applications submitted under this mechanism should be exploratory and novel. These studies should break new ground or extend previous discoveries toward new directions or applications. Projects of limited cost or scope that use widely accepted approaches and methods within well established fields are better suited for the R03 small grant mechanism. Information on the R03 program can be found at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/r03.htm.
This FOA uses "Just-in-Time" information concepts. It also uses the modular budget formats (see the "Modular Applications and Awards" section of the NIH Grants Policy Statement. Specifically, if you 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 5.4, "Modular Budget Component," of the Application Guide).
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
Exploratory/developmental grant support is for new projects only; competing renewal (formerly "competing continuation") applications will not be accepted. Up to two resubmissions (formerly "revisions/amendments") of a previously reviewed exploratory/developmental grant application may be submitted. See NOT-OD-03-041, May 7, 2003.
Submission of an application under this FOA precludes concurrent submission of any other Public Health Service application containing substantially the same research proposal.
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.
The total project period for an application submitted in response to this funding opportunity may not exceed 2 years.
the size of award may vary with the scope of research proposed, it is expected
that applications will stay within the budgetary guidelines for an
exploratory/developmental project; direct costs are
limited to $275,000 over an R21 two-year period, with no more than $200,000 in
direct costs allowed in any single year. Applicants may request direct costs in
$25,000 modules, up to the total direct costs limitation of $275,000 for the combined two-year award period. NIH grants policies as
described in the NOT-OD-05-004, November 2,
All awards are subject to the availability of funds. The estimated amount of funds available for support of projects awarded as a result of this announcement is $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2007. Given the range of budgets among the mechanisms supported by these three announcements, it is estimated that as few as five, and as many as 25, awards could be made. A reasonable estimate would be 10-12 grants supported.
Section III. Eligibility Information
1.B. Eligible Individuals
Any individual with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Project Director/Principal Investigator (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. The NIH review criteria for approach, investigators, and environment have been modified to accommodate applications involving either a single PD/PI or multiple PDs/PIs. 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
This program does not require cost sharing as defined in the current NIH Grants Policy Statement.
3. Other-Special Eligibility Criteria
Applicants may submit more than one application, provided each application is scientifically distinct.
Section IV. Application and Submission Information
To 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/Apply/ 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 Started
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 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: firstname.lastname@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 (MS Word or PDF).
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/PI's 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 is comprised of data arranged in separate components. Some components are required, others are optional. The forms package associated with this FOA in Grants.gov/APPLY will include all applicable components, required and optional. A completed application in response to this FOA will include the following components:
SF424 (R&R) (Cover component)
Research & Related Project/Performance Site Locations
Research & Related Other Project Information
Research & Related Senior/Key Person
PHS398 Modular Budget
PHS398 Cover Page Supplement
PHS398 Research Plan
PHS398 Checklist
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 15 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" (Section 14 of the Research Plan Component in the SF424 (R&R)), 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 5.4 of the Application Guide for further instruction regarding the use of the PHS398 Modular Budget component.
Submission Dates and Times
See Section IV.3.A for details.
3.A. Submission, Review, and Anticipated Start Dates
Opening Date: February 2, 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
To submit an application in response to this FOA, applicants should access this FOA via http://www.grants.gov/Apply and follow steps 1-4. Note: Applications must only be submitted electronically. PAPER APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.
3.C. Application Processing
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 submission/receipt date(s). (See Section IV.3.A. for all dates.) If an application is not submitted by the receipt date(s) and time, the application may be delayed in the review process or not reviewed.
Once an application package has been successfully submitted through Grants.gov, any 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 business days to view the application image.
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. 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 Review
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 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 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 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. 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 "Registration FAQs – Important Tips -- Electronic Submission of Grant Applications."
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
While each section of the Research Plan component needs to be uploaded separately as a PDF attachment, applicants are encouraged to construct the Research Plan component as a single document, separating sections into distinct PDF attachments just before uploading the files. This approach will enable applicants to better monitor formatting requirements such as page limits. All attachments must be provided to NIH in PDF format, filenames must be included with no spaces or special characters, and a .pdf extension must be used.
All application instructions outlined in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide (MS Word or PDF) are to be followed, incorporating "Just-in-Time" information concepts, and with the following requirements for R21 applications:
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 of the Research Plan component. 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
Not Applicable.
Sharing Research Resources
policy expects that grant awardee 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 Public Health Service (PHS) referral guidelines.
Appropriate scientific review groups convened in accordance with the standard NIH peer review procedures (http://cms.csr.nih.gov/ResourcesforApplicants/) 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 NIH R21 exploratory/developmental grant is a mechanism for supporting novel scientific ideas or new model systems, tools, or technologies that have the potential to significantly advance our knowledge or the status of health-related research. Because the Research Plan component is limited to 15 pages, an exploratory/developmental grant application need not have extensive background material or preliminary information as one might normally expect in an R01 application. Accordingly, reviewers will focus their evaluation on the conceptual framework, the level of innovation, and the potential to significantly advance our knowledge or understanding. Reviewers will place less emphasis on methodological details and certain indicators traditionally used in evaluating the scientific merit of R01 applications, including supportive preliminary data. Appropriate justification for the proposed work can be provided through literature citations, data from other sources, or, when available, from investigator-generated data. Preliminary data are not required for R21 applications; however, they may be included if available.
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 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.
Significance: Does this study address an important problem? If the aims of the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge or clinical practice be advanced? What will be the effect of these studies on the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
Approach: Are the conceptual or clinical framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well integrated, well reasoned, and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics?
Innovation: Is the project original and innovative? For example: Does the project challenge existing paradigms or clinical practice; address an innovative hypothesis or critical barrier to progress in the field? Does the project develop or employ novel concepts, approaches, methodologies, tools, or technologies for this area?
Investigators: Are the PD/PIs appropriately trained and well suited to carry out this work? Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal investigator and other researchers? Does the investigative team bring complementary and integrated expertise to the project (if applicable)?
Environment: Does the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Do the proposed studies benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, or subject populations, or employ useful collaborative arrangements? Is there evidence of institutional support?
Additional Review Criteria:
In addition to the above criteria, the following items will continue to be considered in the determination of scientific merit and the priority score:
Applications (formerly "revised/amended" applications): Are the responses
to comments from the previous scientific review group adequate? Are the
improvements in the resubmission application appropriate?
Protection of Human Subjects from Research Risk: The involvement of human subjects and protections from research risk relating to their participation in the proposed research will be assessed. See item 6 of the Research Plan component of the SF424 (R&R).
Inclusion of Women, Minorities and Children in Research: The adequacy of plans to include subjects from both genders, all racial and ethnic groups (and subgroups), and children as appropriate for the scientific goals of the research will be assessed. Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects will also be evaluated. See item 7 of the Research Plan component of the SF424 (R&R).
Care and Use of Vertebrate Animals in Research: If vertebrate animals are to be used in the project, the five items described under item 11 of the Research Plan component of the SF424 (R&R) will be assessed.
Biohazards: If materials or procedures are proposed that are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, determine if the proposed protection is adequate.
Additional Review Considerations
Budget: The reasonableness of the proposed budget and the requested period of support in relation to the proposed research. The priority score should not be affected by the evaluation of the budget.
Applications from Foreign Organizations: Whether the project presents 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 will be assessed.
Sharing Research Data
Not Applicable.
Sharing Research Resources
NIH policy requires that grant awardee 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.
Program staff will be responsible for the administrative review of the plan for sharing research resources.
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.,
3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates
Not Applicable.
Section VI. Award Administration Information
Award Notices
After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his/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.
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:
Minda Lynch, Ph.D.
Division of Basic Neurosciences and Behavior Research
National Institute on Drug Abuse, NIH, DHHS
6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 4282, MSC 9555
Bethesda, MD 20892-9555
Telephone: (301) 435-1322
Fax: (301) 594-6043
Email: email@example.com
2. Peer Review Contact:
Not applicable.
3. Financial or Grants
Management Contact:
Catherine Mills, Grants Management Branch
National Institute on Drug Abuse/NIH/DHHS
6101 Executive Boulevard, Room 270
Bethesda, MD 20892-8403
Telephone: (301) 443-6710
Fax: (301) 594-6849
Email: firstname.lastname@example.com
Section VIII. Other Information
Required Federal Citations
Use of Animals in Research:
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 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 And Minorities in Clinical Research:
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-02-005.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. Applications that do not provide this information will be returned without review.
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) must be used for publicly accessible on-line journal articles. Unless otherwise specified in this solicitation, Internet addresses (URLs) should not be used to provide any other information necessary for the review because reviewers are under no obligation to view the Internet sites. Furthermore, we caution reviewers that their anonymity may be compromised when they directly access an Internet site.
Healthy People
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 PA 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 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:
(CNN) - New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and President Donald Trump are trading barbs over the "Green New Deal."
Ocasio-Cortez is among the sponsors of the sweeping environmental and economic proposal introduced in the House last week.
And neither she nor Trump have minced words talking about the proposal - and each other.
The president said the proposal "sounds like a high school term paper that got a low mark" at a rally in El Paso on Monday night.
"I really don't like their policy of taking away your car, of taking away your airplane flights, of, 'Let's hop a train to California,' of, 'You're not allowed to own cows anymore.'"
Ocasio-Cortez was quick to respond, saying in a tweet, "Ah yes, a man who can't even read briefings written in full sentences is providing literary criticism of a House resolution."
Ocasio-Cortez has become the face of the effort to get the climate change debate front and center.
The Green New Deal is an ambitious resolution, aiming to eliminate carbon dioxide emissions in the U.S. by 2030, create jobs and stimulate the economy.
Its estimated costs are in the trillions. However, as a simple resolution, it won't become law, even if the House passes it. Simple resolutions serve more as recommendations or starting points for debate.
It also does not actually call for taking away a person's car, airline flight or right to own a cow.
SEE FOR YOURSELF: Read the resolution here.
There was some confusion about it over the weekend, after Ocasio-Cortez's staff released a summary of it which included provisions not in the original resolution, such as economic security "for all who are unable or unwilling to work."
Her chief of staff said an early draft of the summary was published by accident, clarifying that it was clearly unfinished and doesn't represent the resolution.
Mistake or not, Republicans lined up to follow in the president's footsteps.
Sen. John Thune of South Dakota called it a socialist fantasy. Even worse, Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming said it would "ban livestock" and, with it, ice cream.
But Ocasio-Cortez had a response for that, too.
"Trust me, I like ice cream way too much do that," she tweeted Tuesday night.
"Maybe if the GOP did their job for once & read a piece of legislation, they'd see that communities + jobs come FIRST, not last, in the #GreenNewDeal."
Copyright 2019 CNN. All rights reserved.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The board of directors of each qualified lender shall establish one or more credit review committees, which shall include farmer board representation.
In no case shall a loan officer involved in the initial decision on a loan serve on the credit review committee when the committee reviews such loan.
Any applicant for a loan from a qualified lender that has received a written notice issued under section 2201 of this title of a decision to deny or reduce the loan applied for may submit a written request, not later than 30 days after receiving a notice denying or reducing the amount of the loan application, to obtain a review of the decision before the credit review committee.
A borrower of a loan from a qualified lender that has received notice, under section 2201 of this title, of a decision to deny loan restructuring with respect to a loan made to the borrower, if the borrower so requests in writing within 7 days after receiving such notice, may obtain a review of such decision in person before the credit review committee.
An applicant for a loan or for restructuring, who is entitled to and has requested a review under this section, may appear in person before the credit review committee, and may be accompanied by counsel or by any other representative of such person's choice, to seek a reversal of the decision on the application under review.
An appeal filed with a credit review committee under this section may include, as a part of the request for a review of the decision filed under subsection (b)(1) or (2), a request for an independent appraisal, by an accredited appraiser, of any interests in property securing the loan (other than the stock or participation certificates of the qualified lender held by the borrower).
Within 30 days after a request for an appraisal under paragraph (1), the credit review committee shall present the borrower with a list of three appraisers approved by the appropriate qualified lender from which the borrower shall select an appraiser to conduct the appraisal the cost of which shall be borne by the borrower, and shall consider the results of such appraisal in any final determination with respect to the loan.
A copy of any appraisal made under this subsection shall be provided to the borrower.
An independent appraisal shall be permitted if additional collateral for a loan is demanded by the qualified lender when determining whether to restructure the loan.
Promptly after a review by the credit review committee, the committee shall notify the applicant or borrower, as the case may be, in writing of the decision of the committee and the reasons for the decision.
(Pub. L. 92–181, title IV, §4.14, Dec. 10, 1971, 85 Stat. 613; Pub. L. 99–205, title III, §303, Dec. 23, 1985, 99 Stat. 1708; Pub. L. 100–233, title I, §106, title VIII, §805(s), Jan. 6, 1988, 101 Stat. 1580, 1716; Pub. L. 100–399, title I, §103, title VII, §702(b), Aug. 17, 1988, 102 Stat. 990, 1006.)
1988—Pub. L. 100–233, §805(s), which directed amendment of this section by substituting "committees" for "committee(s)", "2201" for "2199", and "review" for "reviews", was repealed by Pub. L. 100–399, §702(b). See Construction of 1988 Amendment note below.
Pub. L. 100–233, §106, amended section generally. Prior to amendment, section read as follows: "The board of directors of each Farm Credit System institution shall establish one or more credit review committee(s), which shall include farmer board respresentation. [sic] Any loan applicant who has received written notice, under section 2199 of this title, of a decision to deny or reduce the loan applied for, if the applicant so requests in writing within thirty days after receiving such notice, may obtain a review of such decision in person before the credit review committee. When a loan applicant requests review of an adverse credit decision, a majority of persons serving on such reviews committee must be persons who were not involved in making the adverse decision. Promptly after any such review, the applicant shall be notified in writing of the credit review committee's decision and the reasons therefor."
Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 100–399, §103(a), substituted "before the" for "by a".
Subsec. (d)(1). Pub. L. 100–399, §103(b), inserted "or (2)".
1985—Pub. L. 99–205, in amending section generally, substituted provisions respecting reconsideration of action on loan application for prior reconsideration provisions which read as follows: "Any applicant who has reason to believe that the action on his application by an association failed to take into account facts pertinent to his application, or has misinterpreted or failed to properly apply the applicable law or rules and regulations governing his application, may, if he so requests in writing within thirty days of the date of that notice, request an informal hearing on his application and the action of the association in reduction or denial thereof, or the reason for such action, in person before the loan committee or officer or employee thereof authorized to act on applications under section 2033(11) or 2093(18) of this title. Promptly after such a hearing, he shall be notified of the decision upon reconsideration and the reasons therefor."
Amendment by Pub. L. 100–399 effective as if enacted immediately after enactment of Pub. L. 100–233, which was approved Jan. 6, 1988, see section 1001(a) of Pub. L. 100–399, set out as a note under section 2002 of this title.
Amendment by Pub. L. 99–205 effective thirty days after Dec. 23, 1985, see section 401 of Pub. L. 99–205, set out as a note under section 2001 of this title.
Pub. L. 100–399, title VII, §702(b), Aug. 17, 1988, 102 Stat. 1006, provided that section 805(s) of Pub. L. 100–233, cited as a credit to this section, is repealed and that this section shall be applied and administered as if such section had not been enacted.


text:
A tip has led police to bring charges against a 22-year-old man allegedly caught on cellphone video spray painting a bullfighter on a Picasso masterpiece at a Houston museum.
Uriel Landeros, 22, was charged Friday with criminal mischief and felony graffiti, both third-degree felonies, but was not in custody, according to officials.
A cellphone video taken by another patron June 13 at The Menil Collection allegedly showed Landeros spraying a stencil of a bullfighter killing a bull and the word "conquista" on Picasso's "Woman in a Red Armchair," Houston police said.
The 1929 work is reportedly valued at several million dollars.
Landeros is described as 5 feet, 8 inches tall and weighing 180 lbs. Anyone with information about his location or the involvement of additional suspects is asked to call Crime Stoppers at 713-222-TIPS (8477).
Repair and restoration of the painting is continuing, museum spokesman Vance Muse said by email Friday.
No date has been set for the painting's return to public display at the Menil, Muse said.


text:
There are several ways to increase your exposure and public relations opportunities while at Web 2.0 Expo. These benefits are available to sponsors and exhibitors. Here is a brief highlight of the opportunities available:
Press, analyst, and blogger attendance will be limited to the industry's top influencers from publications, websites and research analyst firms. The press list will grow in the weeks before Web 2.0 Expo, as many press prefer to register at the last minute. Each press and analyst application is carefully screened to ensure that only the most qualified media with the most relevance to your company and the Internet industry attend Web 2.0 Expo.
The list of confirmed press, bloggers, analysts, and other media will be available about a month before the conference and updated weekly before the event to allow for advance work scheduling interviews. It will be distributed through the Exhibitor Resource Center only to sponsors and exhibitors. Note: the confirmed media list will NOT be distributed to third party contacts such as agencies or contractors.
We encourage recipients of the confirmed media list to use it judiciously. The media listed receive many emails from firms associated with Web 2.0 Expo. We would ask that you try and limit the number of times you contact them.
There is no better place to make an announcement, launch a product or roll out a new strategy than at Web 2.0 Expo. We encourage you to connect with a diverse Web 2.0 audience available at the conference by making an announcement from the show. If you have news scheduled, please do the following:
Please be sure we get a copy of any announcements you make at the conference. Please send the URL of your release to Kaitlin Pike at firstname.lastname@example.com so that we can link to it from the Web 2.0 Expo New York website.
There will be at least one, possibly more, rooms set aside as interview rooms. You can schedule a meeting room onsite at the event, on a first-come, first-served basis. Please visit the room and use the clipboard outside the door to reserve the space.
There will be a room dedicated as workspace for the media. Feel free to put your press kit or release on the table in the room. Since this room is designed to be a workspace, we want to discourage hanging out or soliciting the media in any way. You are also welcome to put any collateral or conference "schwag" in the room.
Ally Parker
Kaitlin Pike
(415) 947-6306
View a complete list of Web 2.0 Expo contacts.


text:
Moderators: Eric, Tomas, robin
Eric wrote:Thanks, deleted about 10 more
Eric wrote:Yep, that's true.
As a result I deleted a real user.
We're under attack from those spammers, so mistakes can happen.
Cleaned it up again.
Eric wrote:Thanks, cleaned it up again.
Deleted a user by mistake.
Users browsing this forum: brettpr60, dorothyxt2, hz18, kj18, lavonneev11, victorqk18 and 4 guests


text:
Read the FORUM RULES, PRIVACY POLICY, COPYRIGHT POLICY before posting!
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Here is an updated table showing the actual mintages of the Classical Chinese Garden Medals. The final medal is slated for release in 2017. Meanwhile the Zhuozhengyuan medal should be hitting the streets soon!
It is an anniversary edition, or final in the series?
I suppose they've stuck with the decision to mint this in only the 20 oz size?It seems sad they would end their series this way, any ideas why they chose to do this?
You can see that this design calls for a large medal. Smaller surfaces won't be able to show all the details of the previous medals. This is a summary, so to speak, of the previous ones.
2008 - 2017 CE Collection Inc. All Rights Reserved. Privacy | Copyright
Page created in 0.228 seconds with 43 queries.


text:
Blackboard On-Demand Help Center
= FlashVideo Tutorial (opens a popup window).
= PDFDocument.
= Link.
Working in the Course Environment
Getting Started with Your Course Environment
Select the Page Where Users Enter Your Course
Adding a Banner to Your Course Entry Point
Creating a Blank Page (for displaying content) on the Course Menu
Uploading One or More Files to Your Course
Adding an Avatar to Personalize Your Course Environment
Make Your Course Available to Students
Getting Started with a Moved Course from CE 8 (Old Blackboard)
Building Course Content
Getting Started with Course Content
Adding Textbook Information to Your Course
Adding NBC Archives Video Content
Attaching Course Files to a Content Item
Adding Your Own Web Content Through Course Files
Setting Permissions
Turning Tool Availability On and Off
Making Tools Available to Students
Changing the Course Language Pack
Changing the User Language Pack
Permitting and Restricting Guest and Observer Access
Reporting and Course Utilities (Videos)
Turning On Statistics Tracking for a Content Item
Running a Report of All User Activity
Running a Report of User Activity by Forum
Running a Report of User Activity by Content Area
Running a Report of User Activity by Group
Content Collection (Videos)
Creating a Folder in the Content Collection
Uploading Files to the Content Collection
Uploading a Zipped Package to the Content Collection
Downloading Files in a Zipped Package from the Content Collection
Emailing a File from the Content Collection
Using the Discussion Board
Creating a Discussion Board Forum
Grading a Discussion Board Forum
Creating a Discussion Board Thread
Replying to a Discussion Board Thread
Grading a Discussion Board Thread
Searching the Discussion Board and Collecting Posts
Tagging Discussion Board Posts
Rating Discussion Board Threads
Managing Discussion Board Roles
Changing Discussion Board Forum Settings
Moderating Discussion Board Forums
Managing Group Work
Blogs and Journals
Creating and Editing Journal Entries
Creating and Editing Blog Entries
Announcements and Scheduling
How to Send and Receive Blackboard Course Messages
Grade Center
Getting Started with the Grade Center
Customizing the Grade Center View
Creating a Grade Center Report
Associating a Rubric with a Gradable Item
Setting the Needs Grading Status and Grading Interactive Tools
Grading Assessments Question by Question
Creating Calculated Grade Center Columns
Hiding a Grade Center Column from Students
Viewing and Downloading Grade History
Working Offline with the Grade Center
Tests, Surveys, and Pools
Setting Test Options (includes setting the timer for a test)
Tour the Question Finder Feature
Exporting and Importing a Test or Survey
Uploading Test Questions from Microsoft® Excel
Creating a Fill in the Blank Question
Creating a Short Answer Question
Creating a True or False Question
Adding an Existing Question to a Test
Creating a Calculated Formula Question
Creating a Calculated Numeric Question
Creating a Fill in Multiple Blanks Question
Creating a Multiple Answer Question
Creating a Multiple Choice Question
Creating a Random Block and Adding It to a Test
The Sample Quiz - Help Prepare Students for Online Tests
Getting Started with Assignments
Clean Out Graded Assignment Files
Student Performance
Best Practices
Balancing Asynchronous and Synchronous Learning in a Blackboard System
Beginning of Semester Checklist
Using Blackboard for Problem-Based Learning
Delivering Documents to your Students
Audio and Video Standards for Online Learning
Back to Blackboard


text:
Related Articles
- Report from London. Grigg, Jennifer // Afterimage;Jan/Feb97, Vol. 24 Issue 4, p4
Presents information on several photograph and video exhibitions, which were held in London, England. Sherrie Levine's exhibition at the South London Gallery; Exhibitions at the Lisson Gallery, by James Casebere and Gaylen Gerber; Information on an exhibition that focused on the interplay...
- Reticence and reverence. Morgan, Ann Lee // Afterimage;Jan/Feb97, Vol. 24 Issue 4, p18
Reviews the photography exhibition `Photography and Beyond in Japan: Space, Time and Memory.'
- TAKING A LONG, HARD LOOK. Bowles, K. Johnson // Afterimage;May/Jun2000, Vol. 27 Issue 6, p12
Reviews the exhibition `Robert Heinecken, Photographist: A Thirty Five-Year Retrospective,' at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Chicago, Illinois from October 1 to November 28, 1999.
- Recording the voice. Leotta, Joan; Haverkamp, Beth // Cobblestone;Dec93, Vol. 14 Issue 10, p40
Comments on `American Voices,' a recent exhibit at the National Archives in Washington, D.C., which celebrated our First Amendment right to `petition the government for redress of grievances.' The wide range of petitions preserved there, including many written by children; Example of students...
- Flowers in film. D.A.S. // Horticulture;Jun/Jul93, Vol. 71 Issue 6, p13
Announces that `Flora Photgraphica: The Flower in Photography, 1835 to the Present' will be on view at the New York Public Library June 26 through August 21, 1993. Collection of 182 color and black-and-white images taken by photographic pioneers such as William Fox Talbot and Anna Atkins, as...
- Mid-Atlantic. Leonard, Robert J. // PSA Journal;Oct93, Vol. 59 Issue 10, p43
Lists the 1994 photographic seminars, conferences and workshops in the Mid-Atlanic Zone of the United States. 20th Annual Seminar and Workshop of the Greater Washington Council of Camera Clubs; 34th Photo Conference of Berks Camera Club; Delaware Valley PhotoFest.
- North Central. Kriete, Russell // PSA Journal;Oct93, Vol. 59 Issue 10, p44
Lists the photographic exhibitions, seminars, conferences and workshops in the North Central Zone of the United States. Portraiture workshop of the Fort Wayne Co-Ed Camera Club in Indiana; Winner of the Charles (FPSA) and Betty Stinson Service Award; 56th wedding anniversary of Charles and Betty...
- Division news: Photojournalism. Troy, Lynn // PSA Journal;Feb98, Vol. 64 Issue 2, p45
Announces the PJD-sponsored biennial theme exhibition for slides and prints. Features of the exhibition.
- Division news: Stereo. Rhoda, Mary Ann // PSA Journal;Feb98, Vol. 64 Issue 2, p47
Reports on the growing popularity of Stereo Card Exhibitions in the United States. Contact information on how to join a Stero Card Circuit.


text:
PHILADELPHIA (AP) Daniel Stewart scored 21 points to lead Rider to a 75-66 come-from-behind nonconference victory over Drexel on Saturday.
The Broncs (5-4) trailed by nine points, 46-37, in the second half before running off 14 in a row to lead 51-46 with 8:57 remaining.
The Dragons (2-5) never led again, but they tied the game 60-60 with 4:01 to play on two free throws by Damion Lee, who finished with 28 points and eight rebounds. A jumper by Nurideen Lindsey gave Rider the lead for good, 62-60, at the 2:38 mark and started an 11-2 run.
Rider, which trailed 31-30 at halftime, shot 64 percent (16 of 25) in the second half to Drexel's 37.9 percent (11 of 29).
Jonathon Thompson added 14 points and four steals for the Bronc, Lindsey scored 12 and Anthony Myles had seven points and eight rebounds.