text:
Document:Colorado State Party Constitution 2018 (Revised with Style Changes)
[Adopted in Convention March 24th, 2018]
Article I – NAME
Section 1: The name of the political party shall be the Libertarian Party of Colorado, hereinafter referred to as "the Party."
Article II – PURPOSES
Section 1: The purpose of the Party is to implement and give voice to libertarian principles, such as those in the Statement of Principles of the national Libertarian Party, throughout the state of Colorado by:
providing leadership and direction for the libertarian movement in Colorado; communicating the message and positions of the Party; entering into political information and educational activities; promoting, chartering, coordinating, and supporting Party affiliates; growing the Party through attracting and retaining members; attracting, nominating, and promoting professional, serious Party candidates for political office; and promoting libertarian legislation throughout Colorado.
Article III – PRINCIPLES
Section 1: The Party shall take no positions inconsistent with the Statement of Principles of the national Libertarian Party.
Article IV – MEMBERS
Section 1: Membership in the Party is exclusively limited to all registered electors ("Voters") in the State of Colorado whose party affiliation is "Libertarian." Membership in the Party begins on the date an eligible Voter signs an approved voter application form or personal letter conforming to statute (collectively, "Application"), where "Libertarian," or a reasonable abbreviation thereof, has been indicated as the party affiliation, and the Application is subsequently accepted by the Voter's county Clerk and Recorder. Membership in the Party ends on the date the Voter either signs an Application where another party, "Unaffiliated," or a reasonable abbreviation of either, has been indicated as the party affiliation, and the Application is subsequently accepted by the Voter's county Clerk and Recorder; or the Voter registers in another state.
Section 2: In the absence of the receipt section from the voter application form which has been properly initialed and dated by a voter registration drive circulator, or of a copy of the Application notarized no later than the first business day following the date of signing, proof of membership by voter registration shall be determined by the Records Director or the Credentials Committee through confirmation with the Secretary of State or the Clerk and Recorder of the county in which the applicant has registered.
Section 3: A prospective member may challenge an error of the Secretary of State or a Clerk and Recorder by virtue of an affidavit signed by two (2) other Party members who are in good standing.
Section 4: Any current Party member in good standing may challenge the validity of the proof of membership. The burden of proof of invalidation shall be upon the challenging member.
Section 5: No membership in any other organizations shall be required of any applicant for consideration for Party membership.
Section 6: All offices, delegations, candidacies, and other roles within the Party and its affiliates shall be occupied and exercised only by Party Members.
Article V – OFFICERS
Section 1: There shall be eleven (11) Party Officers ("Officers"), as follows: Chair, Vice Chair, Regions Director, Campaigns Director, Outreach Director, Membership Director, Communications Director, Records Director, Legislative Director, Treasurer, and Fundraising Director. Only Convention delegates eligible to vote may run for a Party Office, and only if they promise to fulfill the requirements of this article.
Section 2: Except in the case of an appointed Officer, the following Officers shall be elected in odd-numbered years: Chair, Vice Chair, Regions Director, Campaigns Director, Membership Director, and Communications Director; and the following Officers shall be elected in even-numbered years: Outreach Director, Records Director, Legislative Director, Treasurer, and Fundraising Director. The election of each Office shall be conducted independently of the others, in the order designated in Section 1 of this Article. Such elections shall be conducted by the delegates to the Convention as provided in the Bylaws, and shall not take effect until the Convention has adjourned and the Officer-Elect has signed the Statement of Principles of the national Libertarian Party and a statement disavowing the initiation of force to achieve political or social goals. The term of each Office shall be two (2) years or until a successor is elected or appointed.
Section 3: An appointed Officer's term ends at the adjournment of the next Convention, regardless of year, when an election shall fill either the remainder of the term or the next full term, based on the schedule in Section 2.
Section 4: Officer elections shall exclude any office eliminated upon adjournment and shall include any Office created upon adjournment, regardless of the year designated for it in Section 2, with the term adjusted to end at the Convention of the designated year.
Article VI – BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Section 1: The Board of Directors shall consist of the Party Officers. The Board of Directors shall be the Party's State Central Committee.
Section 2: Any member of the Board of Directors may be suspended by vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the current Board of Directors. Any member of the Board of Directors absent from two (2) consecutive regular meetings of the Board may be suspended at adjournment of the second regular meeting. The Board of Directors may, by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the current members, appoint or reinstate officers if vacancies or suspensions occur. Reinstated or appointed officers are to serve until the next Convention.
Section 3: The Board of Directors shall have control and management of all the affairs, properties, and funds of the Party consistent with this Constitution and shall meet in the manner specified in the Party Bylaws. The Board shall serve as the Party's Vacancy Committee.
Article VII – CONVENTIONS
Section 1: The Party shall hold a Convention of Party Delegates ("Convention") each calendar year, scheduled so that it convenes at least six (6) months after the previous Convention and adjourns no later than sixty-five (65) days before the day of the Colorado primary election.
Section 2: Arrangements may be made by the Board of Directors to provide for members to participate in the Convention from remote locations. At least forty-five (45) days prior to Convention, the Board shall call the Convention by notifying members of the date and location of the Convention, as well as any remote locations. Additionally, the time and place of any Convention and remote locations shall be published fifteen (15) days prior to such Convention in a newspaper of general circulation in each county wherein the members of the Party reside.
Section 3: No fee may be required of any Party member to participate in the business sessions of any Convention; however, fees may be required for participation in other Convention events.
Section 4: Delegates to the business meetings of the Convention must have been Members for at least ninety (90) days immediately prior to the day the first such meeting convenes. The Credentials Committee is authorized to impose general selection criteria such as: capping the number of delegates from any number of counties or districts, giving preference to more senior delegates, or other criteria that will ensure fair representation of the Party Membership—provided such criteria are established prior to and included with the call of the Convention.
Article VIII – NOMINATION OF CANDIDATES
Section 1: The United States Supreme Court has recognized that the nomination of candidates—under political party rules—falls under the First Amendment's Freedom of Association protections and therefore overrides state laws when such rules so state. As such, all rules for nominating candidates are limited to only the Party Constitution and Bylaws, and all state laws regarding nominating candidates are to be considered overridden and void. The Party reserves all First Amendment Rights in this regard.
Section 2: The delegates to the Convention—or a committee designated by the delegates—shall nominate candidates for offices which require the vote of all the electors of the state. Candidates for all other offices may be nominated in the same way.
Section 3: Nomination of all other candidates may be made by the Party representing the area or district in which the candidate must run in accordance with such procedures as the affiliate may provide, subject to the requirements of this Article and ratification by a Party Convention. If no such nominations are made in accordance with this Section, all other candidates may be nominated in the same manner as provided in Section 2.
Section 4: Each candidate must have been a Member for at least one hundred fifty (150) days prior to the Primary Election, and shall sign a statement to the effect that he or she supports the Statement of Principles of the national Libertarian Party and a statement disavowing the initiation of force to achieve political or social goals.
Section 5: In order to qualify for campaign assistance from the Party, any candidate for public office shall be endorsed by a majority of Party members at the Convention, by a committee designated thereby, or by the Board of Directors.
Section 6: Any candidate representing the Party in a partisan contest where party identification on the ballot is permitted shall use the designation "Libertarian." Only candidates approved by the process set forth in this Article may use this designation.
Section 7: The Party, its affiliates, and its elected Officers, either individually or as a group, shall endorse only Libertarian candidates for nomination or election to partisan public office.
Section 8: In addition to candidates, "None of the Above" (NOTA) shall be a choice on every nomination ballot cast. At no time shall NOTA be removed from the nomination ballot, even under suspension of the Convention Rules. Should NOTA win the nomination for a partisan office, the Party shall put forth no candidate for that office in the general election.
Article IX – PARTY AFFILIATES
Section 1: The Board of Directors of the Party may charter as affiliates those organizations requesting such status to represent counties, or other geographical entities, if requested by affected members and approved by the Board of Directors. Affiliates shall be chartered for, but shall not be limited to, the following purposes:
nominating candidates for public office; working to elect Libertarian candidates and to promote Libertarian principles through political information and educational activities; and selecting representatives to appropriate Party activities. Each affiliate so chartered shall declare, for the purposes of liaison between the Party and the chartered affiliate, an Affiliate Representative.
Section 2: Every organization so chartered shall ratify the Statement of Principles of the national Libertarian Party. They shall also submit contact information for their officers, who shall include at least a Chair and a Treasurer, with both being separate people. They shall maintain at least five (5) members, publish their bylaws to those members and the State Board of Directors, and file their initial Fair Campaign Practices Act filings as necessary.
Section 3: The Board of Directors shall have the power to revoke the affiliate status of any organization by a three-fourths (3/4) vote of the current Board if said affiliate supports candidates, policies, or positions inconsistent with the Statement of Principles of the national Libertarian Party or the State Party Platform; fails to hold an annual meeting with at least five (5) members where officers are elected with contact information and minutes submitted to the State Board of Directors; or fails to report to the proper governmental agencies their Fair Campaign Practices Act filings. Thirty (30) days' notice by certified mail shall be given to the Affiliate Representative of the affected affiliate.
Article X – BYLAWS
Section 1: The Bylaws may be amended by a majority vote of the Delegates to the Convention, provided the amendment is included in the annual report or a minority report of the Constitution and Bylaws Committee, or written notice including the formal language of the amendment and signed by two (2) Members is provided to the Board at least two (2) Board meetings prior to the Convention. Such notice shall be posted to the Party's website within two (2) business days of receipt.
Article XI – PLATFORM
Section 1: The Party may adopt or amend, by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the Delegates to the Convention, a Platform stating its position on all political issues affecting the state or any constituent entity thereof, provided the amendment is included in the annual report or a minority report of the Platform Committee, or written notice including the formal language of the amendment and signed by two (2) Members is provided to the Board at least two (2) Board meetings prior to the Convention. Such notice shall be posted to the Party's website within two (2) business days of receipt. Any Platform plank or the entire Platform may be repealed by a simple majority of the Delegates to the Convention.
Article XII – AMENDMENTS
Section 1: This Constitution may be amended at any Party Convention by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the Delegates to the Convention, provided the amendment is included in the annual report or a minority report of the Constitution and Bylaws Committee, or written notice including the formal language of the amendment and signed by two (2) Members is provided to the Board at least two (2) Board meetings prior to the Convention. Such notice shall be posted to the Party's website within two (2) business days of receipt. No amendment shall take effect until the adjournment of the Business Session.
Section 2: Any clause which requires a vote greater than the proportion in Section 1 shall not be amended except by a vote of the greater proportion, and this Section shall not be amended except by a vote of the greatest proportion specified anywhere within this Constitution.
Article XIII – SEVERABILITY
Section 1: If any Article, Section, or Clause of this Constitution is to any extent determined to be invalid, illegal, or incapable of being enforced, such Article, Section, or Clause shall be excluded only to the extent of such invalidity, illegality, or unenforceability; all other Articles, Sections, and Clauses hereof shall remain in full force and effect, and to this end the provisions of this Constitution are declared to be severable.
Certified by:
Michael T. Spalding 2018 Convention Secretary, Libertarian Party of Colorado
Style changes added 3/9/2019


text:
of Health and Human Services
Participating Organizations
National Institutes of Health (NIH), (http://www.nih.gov)
Components of Participating Organizations
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), (http://www.niaaa.nih.gov)
Title: Screening and Brief Alcohol Interventions in Underage and Young Adult Populations (R01)
Announcement Type
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.
Announcement (PA) Number: PA-07-406
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number(s)
Key Dates
Release/Posted Date: July 17, 2007
Opening Date: September 5, 2007 (Earliest date an application may be submitted to Grants.gov)
Letters of Intent Receipt Date(s): Not applicable.
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: New Expiration Date January 8, 2011 per NOT-AA-10-002) July 6, 2010.
Due Dates for E.O. 12372
Not Applicable
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
Research Objectives
The purpose of this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) issued by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), National Institutes of Health (NIH), is to encourageresearch grant applications on screening and brief interventions to prevent and/or reduce alcohol use and its adverse consequences.
This FOA is designed to stimulate a developmentally grounded program of research on screening and brief interventions to prevent and/or reduce underage drinking and hazardous young adult drinking. Research objectives of this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) include, but are not limited to: (1) testing strategies to improve screening methods for youth with or at high risk for alcohol-related problems; (2) testing the efficacy and effectiveness of novel or modified existing brief prevention interventions to: (a) prevent or delay the initiation of alcohol use, or (b) decrease the risk for the development of alcohol use disorders (AUDs) and associated problems among youth; (3) examining individual, peer, familial, community, setting, cultural, or other contextual factors that affect the selection, implementation, and outcomes of empirically validated screening measures or brief interventions. Studies of racially and ethnically diverse populations in various social and cultural settings are encouraged. Investigations must be especially sensitive to unique human subject issues when conducting research in minors.
National surveys show that alcohol consumption is highly prevalent among youth under age 21 and young adults. Underage drinking accounts for 16% of alcohol sales and $62 billion in medical, social, and lost quality of life. The modal years for first development of alcohol dependence are 18 to 24. NIAAAs National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiologic Survey (NLAES) showed that early alcohol use correlates strongly with the development of alcohol dependence later in life. Compared to those who delay the onset of use until age 21 or later, those who report beginning to drink at age 15 or younger are 4 times as likely to also describe their drinking in ways consistent with a diagnosis of alcohol dependence at some point in their lives.
Drinking trajectories among youth vary and have been shown to be characterized by amount and frequency of use, escalation patterns, and age of drinking onset. Individual variables (e.g., age, race/ethnicity, puberty and neurobiological maturation, individual, gender, temperament, poor self-regulation, delinquency, intellectual abilities, negative affect, psychiatric comorbidity, self-esteem, expectancies), familial factors (e.g., family history, genetic risk, parental monitoring), and environmental factors (e.g., poverty, college/non-college, peer use, social support, treatment for alcohol/drug problems) have all been implicated in the variability in drinking patterns among underage drinkers and young adult drinkers. According to national surveys, gender disparities in drinking patterns do not emerge until older adolescence when males exhibit greater frequency and quantity of alcohol consumption. In addition, some minorities begin drinking at a later age and levels of drinking vary by gender as well as by specific minority group. For example, although rates of alcohol use, binge drinking, and AUDs have been shown to be greater among some American Indian or Alaska Native adolescents, other American Indian groups are more likely to abstain. Relative to the general population, lower levels of use are reported among African Americans during youth, but higher percentages of heavy and problematic use are reported in adulthood, particularly among males.
The period of adolescence through young adulthood is a heterogeneous period of vulnerability during which developmental transitions may differentially affect individuals. While underage drinking is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality, age-related risk/protective factors and differential consequences throughout pre-, middle, and late adolescence as well as young adulthood have not been fully explored. Underage drinking is multiply-determined and more research is needed to increase understanding of the interplay of adolescent development, alcohol use, and prevention of hazardous use and AUDs. A developmental approach to screening and prevention interventions may: (1) optimally identify those with greater vulnerability and critical periods of risk, and (2) be more efficacious in minimizing risk and altering drinking trajectories (i.e., delaying and/or preventing the initiation and/or escalation of alcohol use, minimizing the risk for alcohol use disorders) thereby reducing morbidity and mortality among youth.
Underage drinking is a significant public health problem that is associated with costs to individuals and society, including intentional/unintentional injuries (e.g., motor vehicle crashes, suicide), violent crime, sexual assault, risky sexual behavior, physical health effects (e.g., possible adverse effects on the developing brain, alcohol poisoning), educational underachievement, occupational and social consequences (e.g., deviant peer network), licit and illicit drug use, and mental health problems. Early recognition and identification of alcohol misuse among youth has potential to reduce alcohol-related harm. A primary objective of screening is to identify individuals at risk for alcohol-related problems but measurement methods must show sensitivity, specificity, and have positive predictive value. Adolescents do not show the same chronic effects of alcohol use (e.g., liver damage, cirrhosis) as older adults do and less is known regarding their alcohol tolerance and sensitivity. Thus, screening measures need to consider a wider range of health behaviors and adverse effects of alcohol exposure. Routine screening in a wide variety of settings may be useful in identifying those at risk for alcohol use disorders and provide an earlier entre into developmentally appropriate and targeted interventions to reduce underage drinking and development of alcohol use disorders. In addition, there is a need for research that explores whether screening at an early age produces long term benefits throughout the life course, for example, lower alcohol consumption levels, reduced risk for alcohol use disorders, etc.
Efforts to measure alcohol use among youth have included an examination of consumption levels (e.g., age of onset and prevalence of current or lifetime use; severity of use or hazardous use), consequences of use (e.g., physical, social, psychological effects), or diagnosis of alcohol abuse/dependence. Several measures have been empirically-developed or applied to adolescents and young adult populations in order to screen for hazardous use and/or alcohol-related problems; these include but are not limited to the Adolescent Alcohol Involvement Scale (Mayer & Filstead, 1979), Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT; Babor et al., 1992), CAGE (Ewing, 1984), CRAFFT (Knight et al., 1999), Customary Drinking and Drug Use Record (CDDR; Brown et al., 1998), Drug Use Screening Inventory (DUSI; Tarter, 1990), A-Obsessive Compulsive Drinking Scale (A-OCDS; Deas et al., 2002), Personal Experience Screening Questionnaire (PESQ; Winters, 1992), Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers (POSIT; Rahdert, 1991), RAFFT (Bastiaens et al., 2000), Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index (White & Labouvie, 1989), Substance Abuse Subtle Screening Inventory-Adolescent (SASSI-A; Miller, 1990; Miller & Lazowski, 2001), TWEAK (Russell, 1994), and Youth Diagnostic Screening Test (Alibrandi, 1978). However, not all of these measures are sensitive in detecting alcohol misuse and related problems in adolescents, some may require modifications of thresholds for detection of use vs. diagnosis of problem drinking, and may not lend themselves to examination of longitudinal transitions in patterns of alcohol use. Others may not be transportable to all settings (e.g., schools, primary care, juvenile detention centers) or populations (ethnic minorities) and do not fully consider personality or temperamental traits that may pose a risk for the development of alcohol involvement. Some studies, but not all, show that the onset of alcohol use occurs at earlier ages with as many as 10% of youth beginning to drink as early as ages 9 to 10. More research is needed that develops and tests screening and assessment measures that are developmentally appropriate, practical, and psychometrically valid as well as tailored to high risk and specific subpopulations (e.g., younger adolescents, gender, race/ethnicity, rural/urban, adolescents with psychiatric comorbidity) and settings (e.g., schools, primary care, pediatric clinics, mental health settings, work-place, juvenile courts, traffic courts, Internet, Hi-tech phones). Studies of barriers to screening are needed (e.g., insurance and reimbursement issues, parental involvement, health care provider attitudes, lack of provider time and training, disincentives to reporting alcohol related injuries, large scale implementation problems, setting implementation processes, cultural bias, validation of self-report, other ethical issues). Studies comparing the effectiveness of screening and brief interventions by different types of health care professionals are also needed (e.g., physicians, nurses, social workers, psychologists, court officials, community outreach workers, educational counselors, etc.).
Examples of research that are encouraged by this FOA are given below, and are not meant to be exclusive:
Brief Interventions
Individuals who develop AUDs at younger ages are less likely to seek alcohol-related treatment and are more likely to experience chronic-relapsing alcohol disorders. Earlier screening strategies and assessment of hazardous drinking can be used to delay the onset and escalation of alcohol use disorders, identify risk for AUDs, and classify individuals into developmentally-oriented or high risk typologies, thereby improving referral to appropriate interventions to reduce drinking and prevent AUDs.
Brief interventions have been implemented in a variety of settings to reduce alcohol-related harm in youth, for example, emergency rooms, primary care, school-based settings, and mass media. However, some settings (e.g., workplace) have not been fully explored. Work has been associated with hazardous alcohol consumption and other risky behaviors among youth, even when controlling for sociodemographic variables. Work settings offer an underutilized community level-arena where prevention interventions may be offered.
No single brief intervention has been reported to be effective across a wide range of populations and settings. Brief intervention studies to date have suffered from limited outcome measurement, measurement inconsistencies, variability in intensity and intervention goals, and modest effect sizes. Multidimensional developmental models need to inform the design and implementation of prevention interventions in light of the heterogeneity of adolescent populations and multiple risk pathways that influence the development of AUDs. Therefore, more research is needed to: (1) test the efficacy and effectiveness of theoretically-based and developmentally appropriate brief interventions, (2) develop effective interventions that target specific subpopulations and settings, and (3) examine moderators and mediators of the differential effectiveness of these brief interventions. In addition, greater understanding is needed regarding effects of the modality of the intervention (e.g., brief vs. enhanced, narrow vs. multiple risk-behavior focus, marketing strategy, parental/familial, in person vs. brochure, individual vs. group-based, teacher vs. student-led, Internet-based, etc.) on successful outcomes.
Examples of research that are encouraged by this FOA are given below, and are not meant to be exclusive:
See Section VIII, Other Information - Required Federal
Citations, for policies related to this
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.
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.
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
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).
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/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.
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 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
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.
Submission Dates and Times
See Section IV.3.A. for details.
3.A. Submission, Review, and Anticipated Start Dates
Opening Date: September 5, 2007 (Earliest date an application may be submitted to Grants.gov)
Letters of Intent Receipt Date(s): Not Applicable
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/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.
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.
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 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.
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
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;
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
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.
Applicants requesting more than $500,000 in direct costs in any year of the proposed research must include a plan for sharing research data in their application. The funding organization will be responsible for monitoring the data sharing policy (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing).
The reasonableness of the data sharing plan or the rationale for not sharing research data may 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
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.
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?
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).
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 or her Summary Statement (written critique) via the NIH eRA Commons.
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.
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):
Mariela C. Shirley, Ph.D.
Division of Epidemiology and Prevention Research
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
5635 Fishers Lane
Room 2086, MSC 9304
Bethesda, MD 20892-9304
Telephone: (301) 443-9787
Fax: (301) 443-8614
Email: firstname.lastname@example.com
2. Peer Review Contact(s):
Not Applicable.
3. Financial/Grants Management Contact(s):
Judy Fox
Chief, Grants Management Branch
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
5635 Fishers Lane
Room 3023, MSC 9304
Bethesda, MD 20892-9304
Telephone: (301) 443-4704
Fax: (301) 443-3891
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.
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.
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.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Fluid dynamics
From CFD-Wiki
Fluid Dynamics is the study of fluids in motion. The basic equations governing fluid motion have been known for more than 150 years and are called the Navier-Stokes equations which govern the motion of a viscous, heat conducting fluid. Various simplifications of these equations exist depending on which effects are insignificant. There are several dimensionless parameters which characterize the relative importance of various effects. Some of these are Mach number, Reynolds number and Prandtl number.
Simplified flow models
Related Pages
- Governing Equations
- Compressible Flow
- Dimensional Analysis (introductory)
- Turbulence
- Turbulence DNS database
- CFD-online References - Course Material and Videos
External Links
- The Turbulent History of Fluid Mechanics, a poem by Naomi Tsafnat
- Highlights in the History of Hydraulics, by Hunter Rouse
- Gallery of Fluid Motion
- Introductory Movies on Fluid Mechanics, by Hunter Rouse


text:
Emilian Robert Vicol/Flickr
Recently, attorneys for the Environmental Protection Agency urged the U.S. Supreme Court to review a decision of the D.C. Circuit Court in a case called EME Homer City Generation. In that case, the attorneys said, the lower court "committed a series of fundamental errors that, if left undisturbed, will gravely undermine the EPA's enforcement of the Clean Air Act."
Update 4/29/14: The Supreme Court of the United States has overruled the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals' decision involving EPA's Cross-State Air Pollution Rule.
In EME Homer City Generation, which was decided last summer, a divided court overturned the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, one of the EPA's most important (and cost-effective) clean air programs. It is designed to reduce harmful smokestack pollution from power plants, which can drift for hundreds of miles and adversely affect distant communities.
Major public health consequences at stake
The rule, once put into practice, will save up to 34,000 lives per year and provide $110 to $280 billion per year in net health benefits. Without it, millions of people and entire communities will remain exposed to dangerous levels of pollution.
The Clean Air Act's "good neighbor" provisions direct states to "prohibit" emissions that are carried downwind and contribute to unhealthy air pollution in neighboring states. If states do not live up to their good neighbor obligations, then the Clean Air Act requires EPA to step in. According to 2011 estimates, air pollution from neighboring states accounted for more than three-quarters of local air pollution in many areas struggling to comply with EPA's . As this data shows, millions of Americans are breathing unhealthy air that originates in neighboring states.
Nonetheless, numerous power companies and several states had challenged the Cross-State Rule in the D.C. Circuit. In the court's 2-1 decision, the majority said that EPA exceeded its authority under the Clean Air Act because the Cross-State Rule might have made the air too clean in some communities that are afflicted by harmful air pollution from other states. The ruling essentially gives upwind states the right to send large amounts of smokestack pollution to downwind states and communities, so long as the level of air pollution in the affected downwind communities meets EPA's standards. In other words, downwind communities do not a have a right to truly clean air, just air that is "clean enough."
The majority also found in the Clean Air Act several "red lines" preventing EPA from reducing harmful interstate air pollution, despite the fact that none of those "red lines" appear anywhere in the text of the Act itself.
In her vigorous dissenting opinion, Judge Judith Rogers explained that the majority "erased from the statute by judicial fiat" the Clean Air Act's "mandatory, unambiguous requirements" that upwind states reduce emissions that afflict downwind states. (Emphasis in original.)
Appeal to the Supreme Court
In asking that the Supreme Court review this decision, the EPA is essentially asking for the right to implement the Cross-State Rule, and to fulfill its Clean Air Act obligations. EDF, along with the American Lung Association, Clean Air Council, Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club have also filed a petition seeking Supreme Court review and a reversal of the D.C. Circuit decision. The clean air safeguards of the Cross-State Rule need to be restored.
A fair and reasonable demand
The problem of air pollution crossing state lines is an old one. In 1907, the State of Georgia asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stop dangerous air pollution that was blowing in from Tennessee. In granting Georgia's request, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. wrote:
"It is a fair and reasonable demand on the part of a sovereign that the air over its territory should not be polluted on a great scale by sulphurous acid gas, that the forests on its mountains, be they better or worse, and whatever domestic destruction they have suffered, should not be further destroyed or threatened by the act of persons beyond its control, that the crops and orchards on its hills should not be endangered from the same source."
Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co., 206 U.S. 230, 238 (1907).
Judge Judith Rogers, in her dissent in EME Homer City, expressed similar concerns about the citizens of downwind states, who face air pollution from "persons beyond [their] control," which is precisely why the Cross-State Rule is needed.
The rule, if applied, would do no more (or less) than safeguard the air quality of millions of Americans who depend on EPA to protect them from pollution that comes from beyond the borders of their own states. No wonder, when the U.S. Government called for the Supreme Court to review and reverse EME Homer City, they warned that, should the decision stand, it would "seriously impede the EPA's ability to deal with a grave public health problem."


text:
[Pub.55Yex] Download :
Hellworld PDF
by Tom Leveen : Hellworld
ISBN : #148146633X | Date : 2017-03-21
Description :
PDF-c27e9 | In an effort to put her family back together, a teen struggles to discover what happened to her mother who disappeared during a ghost hunt in this haunting novel from the author of Party, Sick, and Shackled.Five years ago, Abby Booth's mom, cohost of a ghost-hunting reality show, went missing while filming in a "haunted" cave in Arizona. Since then, Abby's life has all but fallen to pieces… Hellworld
Download eBook Hellworld by Tom Leveen across multiple file-formats including EPUB, DOC, and PDF.
PDF: Hellworld
ePub: Hellworld
Doc: Hellworld
Follow these steps to enable get access Hellworld:
[Pub.52Nrl] Hellworld PDF | by Tom Leveen
Hellworld by by Tom Leveen
This Hellworld book is not really ordinary book, you have it then the world is in your hands. The benefit you get by reading this book is actually information inside this reserve incredible fresh, you will get information which is getting deeper an individual read a lot of information you will get. This kind of Hellworld without we recognize teach the one who looking at it become critical in imagining and analyzing. Don't be worry Hellworld can bring any time you are and not make your tote space or bookshelves' grow to be full because you can have it inside your lovely laptop even cell phone. This Hellworld having great arrangement in word and layout, so you will not really feel uninterested in reading.


text:
Turkish-Greek RelationsAthens and Ankara Mark a Fresh Start
"We are aiming to open the way to talk on all kinds of matters so that mutual trust can be established and we can talk about hard issues in time," told a high ranking Turkish diplomat to me who was one of the 320-person delegation of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan that accompanied him during his two-day trip to Athens in mid-May.
He had a point; both Turkish and Greek officials did not hide the fact that there are many long standing disputes and it is not realistic to expect a solution to those issues immediately.
However as columnist Lale Sarıibrahimoğlu from Taraf daily pointed out the more the two countries increase the cooperation through low profile politics, i.e., non-military issues, the more trust will be created to prepare the groundwork to tackle thorny issues.
Deepening cooperation
This is why both Prime Ministers preferred to exchange views on possible cooperation areas instead of trying to find solutions to disputes. Within this framework, the first meeting of the newly introduced High Level Strategic Cooperation Council convened with the participation of ten cabinet ministers from Turkey and seven from Greece.
The Council will meet at least once a year under the chairmanship of the Prime Ministers. The respective ministers will meet at least twice a year to explore ways of deepening the cooperation in their fields.
Both prime ministers, after signing 22 cooperative agreements in many fields including education, the environment, tourism and transportation, strongly underlined that they have the political will to strengthen bilateral relations.
"We have laid the foundations for peace and cooperation despite difficulties of the past," Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou underlined in the joint press conference and recalled that relations between Greece and Turkey have never been steady but now they have decided to take a major step together.
In an exclusive interview that I conducted prior to the visit, however, Papandreou also warned that "Greece and Turkey will never be able to normalize their relations as long as there are threats in the Aegean with regard to the Greek islands and as long as there are occupation forces in Cyprus. We have to put these things behind us once and for all."
Rocky road to reconciliation
To achieve this, however, there are numerous serious obstacles to overcome.
First of all there are long standing sovereignty claims in the Aegean Sea, a problem which brought both countries to the brink of a war in 1996. Each sides possess 6 nautical miles (11 km) off their shores in the Aegean, but Greece wants to expand it continental shelf to 12 miles under the International Law of the Sea. Turkey refers to the same law and says this rule cannot apply in the Aegean because of the proximity of the Greek islands on the Aegean to the Turkish landmass.
Both Erdoğan and Papandreou in their statements strongly underlined that the shared Aegean Sea can turn into a Sea of Peace and they hinted that an agreement might be reached soon on the methods of resolving the territorial dispute in the Aegean.
Hope for Cyprus
Another hard issue between Ankara and Athens is Cyprus on which hope inspiring statements are being made.
Papandreou underlined that Greece wants a solution to the Cyprus problem within the framework of the law. He also warned in the interview with me that newly elected Turkish Cypriot leader Derviş Eroğlu, who is known for his nationalistic stance, should respect the progress that has been made to date in the negotiations.
"If he starts to create stumbling blocks and raise obstacles, he will bear the responsibility. In any case, and this is a fact, Turkey's role remains crucial," he said.
During the joint press conference Erdoğan had promised that the recent negotiation process on the island would continue from where it was left off before elections in Northern Cyprus.
"I strongly believe that as the guarantor states, if we support this process, we can get a result in a very short amount of time. We should unite our efforts as soon as possible," Erdoğan underlined.
The Greek Orthodox Patriarch
But all this does not mean that the Turkish Prime Minister's visit was free of surprises. When Erdoğan was asked if he was uneasy about the definition of Greek Orthodox Patriarch in as "ecumenical", he said "no, it did not make our ancestors uneasy, and it does not make us uneasy either."
During Ottoman rule the Patriarch was recognized as ecumenical but Turkey claims that recognizing the ecumenical status of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchy now would be a violation of the Lausanne Treaty, regarded as the founding bases of the modern Turkish Republic. The Turkish state acknowledges the Patriarch only as the head of the country's dwindling Greek Orthodox community.
This statement of Erdoğan was praised by his Greek counterpart, who promised to improve the rights of the Muslim minority in Greece and underlined in the interview that the construction of a mosque in Athens is an obligation of the Greek state to its Muslims.
Athens is the only European capital which does not have a mosque, an issue that has been raised several times by Erdoğan in bilateral talks. A couple of days before his arrival, the Greek government announced that it would start the construction and that expenditures would be paid by the government.
"It's the economy, lan!"
During Erdoğan's visit, a Greek-Turkish business forum was also held with the participation of more than 100 businessmen from Turkey. The trade volume between two countries is around $2.5 billion and the Prime Ministers set a target of increasing this level to $5 billion within the next five years.
The amount of the trade volume was next to nothing at the beginning of the year 2000. It peaked after the rapprochement that began soon after a deathly and devastating earthquake which struck Turkey's most developed Western parts in 1999. The so-called "earthquake diplomacy" culminated with dialogue being established, albeit slowly.
Now, Greece is facing a deep economic crisis and as Turkish officials put it, it is Turkey's turn to extend a hand of friendship to Greece.
Both Prime Ministers described the meeting in Athens as a historical new beginning despite the fact that there is not much progress on the ground but lots of hope for it as it is stated in the joint declaration:
"The two prime ministers stressed their conviction that the new course of relations will steer Greece and Turkey to a brighter future for the benefit of the two peoples."
Ayşe Karabat
© Qantara.de 2010
Editor: Lewis Gropp/Qantara.de
Pogrom against the Greeks in Istanbul
The Darkest Night on the Istiklal
For the first time, an exhibition in Turkey deals with the pogrom against the Greek minority in 1955. It seems as if Turkey has begun to come to grips with this dark side of its past. By Christiane Schlötzer
Turkey's Kurdish Initiative
Is the Glass Half Empty or Fully Empty?
Recent moves in Turkey to address the country's long-standing "Kurdish issue", although initially welcomed by the nation's Kurds, are increasingly being questioned, with many beginning to doubt whether the efforts are comprehensive or sincere enough to succeed. Ayşe Karabat reports
Turkey-Armenia Relations
Football Diplomacy Starts to Bear Fruits
Turkey and Armenia decided to establish ties due to a process started for the World Cup qualifying game. But just like in football the process faces risks, even off-side, as Ayşe Karabat reports
Interview with Turkey's Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu
"Turkey Creates Balance in the Middle East"
Turkey's foreign policy has been under the spotlight in recent months, with many Western commentators expressing concern about a perceived swing toward a more Middle Eastern orientation. Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu speaks to Ayşe Karabat about his country's new regional role


text:
Content: Way of the Dogg
Price: 800 Microsoft Points
Check availability in your Xbox LIVE region
Dash Text: There is trouble on the street and your weapon's the beat! Listen up, student: everyone has a heartbeat. For some it's the pursuit of money, others are driven by power, and there are many more beats that are less… Clear. All those rhythms, they overlap but the noise of the city doesn't matter to America Jones. America cares about two things… his woman and the fight. He was the best fighter in the city; everyone knew that but then one night, everything changed. Hell bent on revenge, America comes to the Temple to train with Snoop Dogg. Finding the way means finding the beat that drives the fight, in order to revenge Sierra and bring peace to this troubled city… and that is why you are here. Train as AJ, pick a side, take your chances and find the way: The Way of the Dogg. Way of the Dogg is a brutal, rhythm-action combat adventure, set to Snoop Dogg's music. Each level is a fresh fight against a different character in a new location defined by a Snoop Dogg track. As AJ, fight your way through 14 levels, each a superbly choreographed beat-matched fight, set to Snoop's music, including 'Who am I?', 'Gz and Hustlas' and '10 Lil Crips' to name but a few. Go head-to head with friends in multiplayer rhythm battles and follow Snoop's lead in the Temple Tutorials. Train with Snoop, pick a side, take your chances and find the way: The Way of the Dogg.
Content: Way of the Dogg