Frequently Asked Questions
The following set of questions and answers features responses from the Agency
for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to questions from the public
submitted about the Agency's Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) for
Partnerships for Sustainable Research and
Dissemination of Evidence-based Medicine (R24).
These frequently asked questions were updated on May 18, 2012.
The following questions are derived from individual questions submitted to
DisseminationGrants2012@ahrq.hhs.gov about the
Request for Applications (RFA) HS-12-005:
Partnerships for Sustainable Research and Dissemination of Evidence-based
Medicine (R24) and are shared here for all potential applicants. We
encourage applicants to review all replies and to monitor this site for newly
added questions and answers.
A. Eligibility/Who Can Apply
Question A1: What organizations are eligible to apply?
Answer A1: Eligible Institutions: You may submit an
application(s) if your institution/organization has any of the following
characteristics, as described in the RFA:
- Public or non-profit private institution, such
as a university, college, or a faith-based or community-based organization.
- Units of local or State government.
- Eligible agencies of the Federal government.
- Indian/Native American Tribal Government
(Federally Recognized).
- Indian/Native American Tribal Government
(other than Federally Recognized).
- Indian/Native American Tribally Designated
Organizations.
AHRQ's authorizing legislation does not allow for-profit organizations to be
eligible to lead applications under this research mechanism. For-profit
organizations may participate in projects as members of consortia or as
subcontractors only. Because the purpose of this program is to improve
healthcare in the United States, foreign institutions may participate in
projects as members of consortia or as subcontractors only. Applications
submitted by for-profit organizations or foreign institutions will not be
reviewed. Organizations described in section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue
Code that engage in lobbying are not eligible.
Applications from health care provider organizations that directly provide
services to the targeted population, such as integrated health care delivery
systems or primary care Practice-Based Research Networks, interested in
dissemination and implementation research in partnership with appropriate
community stakeholders and members of the target population are also
encouraged.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) grants policy requires
that the grant recipient perform a substantive role in the conduct of the
planned project or program activity and not merely serve as a conduit of funds
to another party or parties. If consortium/contractual activities represent a
significant portion of the overall project, the applicant must justify why the
applicant organization, rather than the party(s) performing this portion of the
overall project, should be the grantee and what substantive role the applicant
organization will play. Justification can be provided in the Specific Aims or
Research Strategy section of the PHS398 Research Plan Component sections of the
SF424 (R&R) application. There is no budget allocation guideline for
determining substantial involvement; determination of substantial involvement is
based on a review of the primary project activities for which grant support is
provided and the organization(s) that will be performing those activities.
Question A2: Can multiple Principal Investigators (PIs)
within an institution submit separate applications with different fields of
study?
Answer A2: Eligible institutions (as described in Section
III.1.A of the RFA) may submit more than one application to RFA-HS-12-005,
provided each application is scientifically distinct. However, AHRQ will not
accept similar grant applications with essentially the same research focus from
the same applicant organization.
Question A3: Are for-profit organizations eligible to apply
for this FOA?
Answer A3: AHRQ's authorizing legislation does not allow
for-profit organizations to be eligible to lead applications under this research
mechanism. Thus, for the purpose of this FOA, AHRQ will make grants only to
non-profit organizations. For-profit organizations may participate in projects
as members of consortia or as subcontractors only. Because the purpose of this
program is to improve health care in the United States, foreign institutions may
participate in projects as members of consortia or as subcontractors only.
Applications submitted by for-profit organizations or foreign institutions will
not be reviewed. Organizations described in section 501(c)(4) of the Internal
Revenue Code that engage in lobbying are not eligible.
HHS grants policy requires that the grant recipient perform a substantive
role in the conduct of the planned project or program activity and not merely
serve as a conduit of funds to another party or parties. If
consortium/contractual activities represent a significant portion of the overall
project, the applicant must justify why the applicant organization, rather than
the party(s) performing this portion of the overall project, should be the
grantee and what substantive role the applicant organization will play.
Justification can be provided in the Specific Aims or Research Strategy section
of the PHS398 Research Plan Component sections of the SF424 (R&R)
application. There is no budget allocation guideline for determining substantial
involvement; determination of substantial involvement is based on a review of
the primary project activities for which grant support is provided and the
organization(s) that will be performing those activities.
B. Investigator Qualifications, Titles, and Other Designations
Question B1: What qualifies a senior investigator to be a
PI? Is it years of experience, academic rank, number of publications, or prior
research grant experience, such as grant leadership?
Answer B1: There are no specific guidelines of what
qualifies a senior investigator to be a PI; this determination is made upon
review by the Special Emphasis Panel. Applicants should make the best case for
their abilities within the application. The RFA clearly describes what the PI
must be able to provide in terms of leading these initiatives.
Individuals with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out
the proposed research are invited to work with their institution/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 AHRQ support.
The Project Director/PI must commit substantial time to the oversight of
project and activities (at a minimum 15% annually).
Question B2: Can the investigator who is designated to act
and make decisions in the absence of the PI be named a co-PI?
Answer B2: No. AHRQ does not recognize multiple PIs, so the
term "co-PI" should not be used. For space considerations and/or convenience, an
applicant may designate some other shorthand or abbreviation to refer to the
designated co-investigator; applicants should make sure this and any other
abbreviations are explicit and clear.
C. Determining Suitability of the Theme, Projects, or Research Ideas for
Submission
Question C1: How can applicants determine if their planned
approach is a good fit for this RFA?
Answer C1: Applicants should read the RFA closely, including
its review criteria; this is the best available guidance to potential applicants
about the responsiveness of their planned research. Applicants should be aware
that the determination of suitability and responsiveness of applications is the
task of the Special Emphasis Panel, not AHRQ.
Question C2: Can applicants discuss the scientific and
research aspects of their proposals with AHRQ?
Answer C2: AHRQ appreciates all expressions of interest from
prospective applicants. Applicants should read the RFA closely, including its
review criteria; this is the best available guidance to potential applicants
about the responsiveness of their planned research.
If applicants have specific questions after reviewing the RFA, they can
E-mail these questions to
DisseminationGrants2012@ahrq.hhs.gov. For
reasons of equity and consistency, AHRQ scientific staff responds in writing to
all inquiries. Wherever it is possible and appropriate, AHRQ will clarify common
areas of uncertainty in a written and generalized format that is applicable for
dissemination to other potential applicants, such as frequently asked
questions.
Telephone counseling on potential study ideas is discouraged in order to be
equitable and avoid potential misdirection of applicants. Applicants should be
aware that the determination of suitability and responsiveness of applications
is the task of the Special Emphasis Panel, not AHRQ.
Question C3: What sources and translation of evidence-based
health information are appropriate in response to this RFA?
Answer C3: Applicants must apply or develop one or more new
or innovative customizations or mechanisms of delivery to the content of
evidence-based information and/or tools in order to enhance their use and value
in decisionmaking by key audiences, including patients/consumers, clinicians,
and policymakers. Comparative effectiveness information/tools must be chosen
from trusted sources, including, but not limited to: AHRQ, Institute of Medicine
(IOM), Cochrane Collaborative, and the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
Adaptations must preserve the fidelity of the original product(s) contents, and
the application must describe methods of adaptation.
A wide range of mechanisms, media, and communication channels may be
considered, including, but not limited to:
- Paper-based products, such as brochures,
narratives, or case studies that are adapted in design, format, or language to
colloquial usage or cultural sensitivities.
- Electronic or technology-based dissemination
channels or tools, such as Internet, television, radio, cell phone, social
networking sites, listservs, health avatars, and others.
- Adaptation to electronic health records,
personal health records, electronic medical records, or clinical decision
support aids attached to these systems.
- Personal interactions occurring through
one-on-one interactions (such as academic detailing, kitchen table meetings) or
group discussions (such as focus groups, social or health care professional
meetings, town hall meetings), or routine settings such as work, school, or
health care clinics.
These and other mechanisms may be combined, as long as the combined
feasibility is addressed and supported in the application. Simple propagation of
unchanged material through printing and distribution, E-mail, or listservs will
not be considered innovative or responsive to this FOA and will not undergo peer
review.
Applicants must describe and support all proposed methods or mechanisms for
adapted presentation and/or delivery of evidence-based health information.
Applications must include a clear rationale and approach for the proposed
adaptation(s) of materials, such as media requirements, cultural sensitivities,
literacy and numeracy, English language proficiency,
visual/educational/cognitive competencies of the targeted audience or
stakeholder group members, information processing and burden, conflicting health
beliefs or information sources, issues with authority or trust of information
provided by the government, or other considerations. Applicants are encouraged,
but not required, to assess the utility of the original evidence-based health
information/tool to the proposed target(s) for adaptation, so as to identify
key, generalizable gaps in content presentation or formatting, acceptance,
understanding, or willingness to apply the materials in actual use situations.
Such assessment would provide evidence to guide subsequent adaptation or
modification of the primary material to a specific audience, system, setting,
communication channel, or expanded purpose.
D. Formatting, Organization, and Page Limits of Submissions
Question D1: Are applications allowed to have
appendices?
Answer D1: An application may include an appendix, but
applicants should not use the appendix to circumvent the specific page limit for
the Research Strategy component. Applicants should observe the page number
limits specified in the RFA. An application will be rejected if it does not
comply with these requirements.
Question D2: Does the 15-page limit for the Research
Strategy section of the application include the Specific Aims?
Answer D2: No. The Specific Aims are limited to one page,
and that page is separate from the Research Strategy. It does not count toward
the 15-page limit.
Question D3: Can the tables and figures be in a smaller font
size?
Answer D3: Yes. A font size smaller than 11 point font may
be used for figures, graphs, diagrams, charts, tables, figure legends, and
footnotes; however, the font type must follow the font typeface requirement
(Palatino, Georgia, Arial, or Helvetica) and be readily legible.
Question D4: Is there a page limit for the appendix?
Answer D4: The FOA does not restrict the number of pages in
the appendix, stating only that applicants should not use the appendix to
circumvent the page limit of the Research Plan component and warning that an
application that does not observe the required page limit may be delayed in the
review process. Applicants should note the special instructions in Section IV.3
of the FOA for submitting appendices to the National Institutes of Health and
AHRQ.
Question D5: Regarding the submission of appendix materials
on CD for an application in response to RFA-HS-12-005, is it correct that five
copies of the CD should be sent to AHRQ and none should be sent to the National
Institutes of Health (NIH) Center for Scientific Review?
Answer D5: Yes. Five copies of the CD containing the
appendix materials should be sent to AHRQ, along with two copies of the
application; no CDs should be sent to the NIH Center for Scientific Review. The
RFA states:
Applications must be prepared using the forms found in the PHS 398
instructions for preparing a research grant application. Submit a signed,
typewritten original of the application, including the checklist, and three
signed photocopies in one package to:
Center for Scientific Review
National Institutes of Health
6701
Rockledge Drive, Room 1040, MSC 7710
Bethesda, MD 20892-7710 (U.S. Postal
Service Express or regular mail)
Bethesda, MD 20817
(for express/courier
service; non-USPS service)
Personal deliveries of applications are no longer permitted (go to http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-040.html).
At the time of submission, two additional copies of the application
and all copies of the appendix material must be sent to:
Partnerships for Sustainable Research and Dissemination FOA
Center for
Outcomes and Evidence
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
540
Gaither Road, Room 6347
Rockville, MD 20850
Telephone: (301)
427-1600
FAX: (301) 427-1521
Email: DisseminationGrants2012@ahrq.hhs.gov
Question D6: Can applications be submitted
electronically?
Answer D6: No. Applications in response to this RFA must be
submitted in hard copy, using the PHS 398, and sent to the Center for Scientific
Review and AHRQ.
Instructions for submitting an application are given in the previous answer
(Answer D5).
PHS 398 application instructions are available at
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html in an
interactive format. Applicants must use the currently approved version of the
PHS 398. For further assistance contact GrantsInfo, Telephone (301) 435-0714,
Email:
GrantsInfo@nih.gov.
Applications must be received on or before the application receipt date
described above (Section IV.3.A.). If an application is received after that
date, the application may be delayed in the review process or not reviewed. Upon
receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness by the Center for
Scientific Review, NIH, and AHRQ. Incomplete and/or non-responsive applications
will not be reviewed.
Question D7: Should the requirements stated in Section IV.6.
be included in the 15-page Research Strategy or in another section of PHS 398?
Answer D7: Yes, the requirements should be included in the
15-page Research Strategy.
Section IV.6. of the RFA states that the application must include:
- How the organizational structure includes, or
will include, a trans-disciplinary core of investigators and institutional
capacity with expertise in dissemination, translation, and implementation of
evidence-based health information.
- A mechanism (such as a community advisory
board) to solicit advice/feedback from the communities of the target population.
- An organizational structure that transcends a
single study, including multiple systems of communication with and among all
investigators, stakeholders and members of the target population.
- A plan for sustainability that would include
but not be limited to:
- Exploration of potential sources of ongoing
funding for the dissemination infrastructure, including professional
organizations, academic institutions, governmental sources, foundations and
other private sources.
- Development of a 3-year "business plan"
demonstrating how core administrative functions for the on-going dissemination
and translation activities can be supported even in the absence of major funding
for project-specific research.
Applications must clearly articulate a plan for building and/or expanding
capacity in four key areas:
- Development and/or strengthening
trans-disciplinary research and outreach capacity devoted to dissemination and
translational research.
- Expanding the reach and strength of
relationships between investigators, stakeholders and the target population.
- Building an enduring infrastructure for
dissemination and translational non-research activities.
- Developing a plan for sustained
dissemination/translation activities independent of research grant support.
Question D8: The PHS 398 instructions state that the total
page limit for the Research Strategy is 12 pages, but the RFA states that the
limit is 15 pages. Which is correct?
Answer D8: When instructions in an RFA differ from the
general application instructions, the instructions in the FOA always supersede
the general instructions. Therefore, the page limit for the Research Strategy is
15 pages.
E. Letters of Intent
Question E1: What specific information should be in the
letter of intent? Is there a particular format or length?
Answer E1: As stated in the RFA, the letter of intent allows
AHRQ staff to estimate the potential peer review workload and plan the review
accordingly (that is, anticipate the nature of reviewer expertise that will be
required). Prospective applicants may submit a letter of intent that includes an
acknowledgement of interest in this funding opportunity (referring to the number
and title of the funding opportunity), a few comments on the subject of the
proposed research, background expertise of key personnel, the nature and role of
participating institutions, and the name and E-mail address of the PI. This
letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and is not considered in the
review of a subsequent application. AHRQ requests that letters of intent for
this FOA be E-mailed to
DisseminationGrants2012@ahrq.hhs.gov by April
27, 2012.
Current as of May 2012
Internet Citation:
Partnerships for Sustainable Research and Dissemination of
Evidence-based Medicine (R24): Frequently Asked Questions. May 2012. Agency
for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD.
http://www.ahrq.gov/fund/rfahs12005faq.htm
