ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE: PARTNERSHIPS FOR COMMUNICATION 

RELEASE DATE:  April 22, 2003

RFA NUMBER: ES-03-007

National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) 
 (http://www.niehs.nih.gov/)
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
 (http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/)

CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE NUMBERS: 93.113, 93.114, 93.115 (NIEHS), 
and 93.956 (NIOSH)

Letter of Intent Receipt Date: September 17, 2003

Application Receipt Date: October 17, 2003 

THIS RFA CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION

o Purpose of this RFA
o Research Objectives
o Mechanism of Support 
o Funds Available
o Eligible Institutions
o Individuals Eligible to Become Principal Investigators
o Special Requirements 
o Where to Send Inquiries
o Letter of Intent
o Submitting an Application
o Peer Review Process
o Review Criteria
o Receipt and Review Schedule
o Award Criteria
o Required Federal Citations

PURPOSE OF THIS RFA

The purpose of this program is to strengthen the National Institute of 
Environmental Health Sciences' (NIEHS) and the National Institute for 
Occupational Safety and Health's (NIOSH) support of research aimed at 
achieving environmental justice for socioeconomically disadvantaged and 
medically underserved populations in the United States.  One goal of the 
NIEHS and NIOSH is to understand the influence of economic and social factors 
on the health status of individuals exposed to environmental toxicants and 
occupational hazards and impact public health.  The intent is to promote 
health research, education and intervention programs that address improved 
ways to serve low income, immigrant, and minorities who may be 
disproportionately exposed to environmental and occupational stressors.  This 
component of the research program in environmental justice is designed to 
encourage community outreach, training, research, education and evaluation 
efforts that will become the catalyst for reducing exposure to or reducing 
the health impact from environmental and occupational stressors in 
underserved populations.  The main objective of this RFA is to establish 
methods for linking members of a community, who are directly affected by 
adverse environmental or occupational conditions, with researchers and health 
care providers and to create partnerships that can address environmental and 
occupational health problems and develop appropriate research and policy 
strategies to impact public health.  

With the intention of impacting public health and policy the National 
Institute of Environmental Health Sciences established the Translational 
Research Program.  This effort supports research and education examining the 
effects and risks to human health from exposure to physical and social 
environmental agents.  The Environmental Justice agenda, which falls within 
the Translational Research Program, is one such endeavor that seeks to 
minimize and prevent adverse health effects from environmental exposures 
through public outreach and education coupled with innovative research to 
develop solutions and have significant impact on public health and policy.  
For further information on the Translational Research Program, see 
http://www.niehs.nih.gov/translat/envjust/envjust.htm.

This current effort on environmental justice will ensure that:

o The community is aware of basic environmental/occupational health concepts, 
issues, and resources.

o The community has a role in identifying and defining problems and risks 
related to environmental and occupational exposures and stressors.

o The community is included in the dialogue and is integral in shaping 
research and policy approaches to the problem.  

o The community actively participates with researchers and health care 
providers in developing responses and setting priorities for education and 
intervention strategies.  

One aim of this program is to facilitate the process of developing the trust 
needed for establishing effective partnerships among individuals who are 
adversely impacted by environmental and occupational hazard(s) in a 
socioeconomically disadvantaged community, researchers in 
environmental/occupational health, and health care providers.  The 
collaborative team should then be able to initiate a research program that 
incorporates all parties and seek to reduce exposure to or health impact from 
environmental and occupational stressors that may manifest in the workplace 
or home environment.

It is important to note that, because of the wide range of environmental 
and/or occupational health problems to be addressed and the diversity of 
affected communities, applications must be multidisciplinary in nature.  At 
least one member of each of the following three personnel groups must have an 
active and meaningful role in both the development of the application and 
conduct of the proposed project: 

o A research scientist in environmental health sciences (including but not 
limited to those at NIEHS Environmental Health Sciences Centers or NIEHS 
Centers for Children's Environmental Health and Disease Prevention Research 
or NIOSH Educational and Research Centers or Agricultural Research Centers).

o A primary health care provider directly involved in a community affected by 
environmental or occupational hazard(s).  This may include a public health 
nurse and other such professionals. This individual must have a record of 
providing health care to the participating community.  It is not necessary 
that the person be affiliated with a county or state public health 
department.

o A community-based organization (CBO) in an area having an underserved 
population that is adversely affected by an environmental or occupational 
hazard.  This CBO must work directly and regularly with the affected 
community.  

These personnel must be listed on Page 2 of the PHS 398 application, and a 
biographical sketch must be provided for each.  The role of each member of 
these three personnel groups in developing the application and carrying out 
the project must be clearly identified and fully described.  There should be 
an equitable distribution of responsibilities as well as of requested 
financial resources among the three personnel groups.  This goal is often 
accomplished through the inclusion of one or more subcontract arrangements, 
which may be helpful in defining all parties' programmatic and budgetary 
roles.  Applications lacking the required personnel will not be considered.

The NIEHS and NIOSH have a significant commitment to the support of programs 
designed to increase the number of underrepresented minority and female 
scientists participating in biomedical, environmental, and behavioral 
research.  Therefore, applications from minority individuals and women are 
encouraged.  Since the projects are situated in the community, 
well-established community-based or faith-based organizations are encouraged 
to consider their capacity to serve as the primary applicant organization.  
Due to the complex administrative, programmatic, and financial 
responsibilities associated with this role, such groups should contact 
Program Staff listed under WHERE TO SEND INQUIRIES for guidance.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

Background

Generally, people want to live long and healthy lives, and a majority of them 
achieve that goal.  However, people who are economically disadvantaged and/or 
who live or work in areas and occupations where conditions result in greater 
exposure to hazardous substances are less likely to do so.  At every stage of 
life, these persons suffer disproportionate levels of morbidity and 
mortality.  Research evidence suggests that certain groups, especially 
minorities and low-income communities, bear an uneven burden of hazardous 
environmental or occupational stressors.  These socioeconomically 
disadvantaged people suffer the lowest life expectancy and the highest 
adverse health consequences of inadequate access to high quality health care.  
Additionally, they most often experience the highest degree of exposure to 
environmental agents and frequently have the least information available 
about the health consequences of exposure to these agents.  

Environmental justice refers to the need to remedy the unequal burden of 
exposure and disease borne by socioeconomically disadvantaged persons in 
terms of residential exposure to greater than acceptable levels of 
environmental pollution, exposure to occupational hazards, and fewer civic 
benefits such as sewage and water treatment.  Geographic location plays an 
important role in environmental exposure of socioeconomically disadvantaged 
persons.  Health problems may be exacerbated by issues relating to geographic 
location and consequences of the built environment such as the lack of 
consistent planning and negligent or unregulated policies in land use and 
zoning, the development and expansion of highways near low income and 
indigent neighborhoods or inadequate transportation facilities.  A specific 
under-addressed area of interest to NIEHS is the public health challenge 
arising from the health impact of the built environment.  For information on 
the built environment, see http://www.niehs.nih.gov/translat/news.htm.

The lack of resources for early identification of the effects of toxic agents 
may lead to an increased disease burden among people who are economically 
least able to cope with it.  Most complex chronic health conditions or 
diseases have an environmental component in their etiology.  An amalgamation 
of factors result in exacerbating the health conditions for low income and 
minority populations.  Many low-income workers are temporary employees or may 
be employed in substandard workplaces and therefore may receive inadequate 
workplace protections and occupational health and safety training programs.  
These workers may also face language or cultural barriers at the workplace.  
When this is the case, the community rather than the workplace may be the 
preferable place to reach these workers to conduct occupational health 
outreach and intervention programs.  For more information about occupational 
health priorities see http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/nora.html.  Some of the issues 
identified by research in the field of environmental and occupational health 
are:

o Inner-city poor often live in homes with high lead levels and may also be 
exposed to higher levels of air pollution.  

o Toxic waste sites are more frequent in rural, low socioeconomic counties in 
the United States.  

o Nuclear facilities and chemical plants are often located in rural areas.  

o Exposure to pesticides is another example where rural, socioeconomically 
disadvantaged populations are at a greater than average risk.  

o Disadvantaged neighborhoods may rely on well water that may be polluted 
with toxic chemicals.  

o Medical care is often inadequate or unavailable to a significant proportion 
of the socioeconomically disadvantaged and minority people. 
 
o Lead poisoning and the cognitive and developmental damage associated with 
exposure to lead occur disproportionately among minorities.  

o High blood pressure and prostate cancer are very common among African 
Americans.

o Low birth weight babies and other problems during pregnancy are common 
among groups of women who do not have access to good prenatal care.  

o Minority and immigrant workers are employed disproportionately in 
industries with higher injury and illness rates, such as food processing, 
textile and garment manufacturing, services including health care services, 
construction and agriculture.
 
o Both African-American and Hispanic workers have been shown to be 
disproportionately impacted by workplace injuries and fatalities. 

o Workers exposed to hazardous substances at workplaces with inadequate 
cleanup facilities can contaminate their homes with toxic substances. 

Recent Progress and Opportunities

Over the past nine years, the NIEHS has supported a variety of environmental 
justice and community-based participatory research programs.  For information 
on previously funded Environmental Justice projects, see 
http://www.niehs.nih.gov/translat/envjust/envjust.htm, and for community 
based participatory research programs, see 
http://www.niehs.nih.gov/translat/cbpr/cbpr.htm.  These programs have been 
very successful in achieving open and honest communication between 
researchers and community members and have had an impact on the health of the 
public.  Working together, researchers and community leaders have been 
successful in identifying the disproportionate environmental health risks in 
certain communities and have formulated viable research agendas.  A needed 
step in this process is gaining participation of community members in efforts 
to understand the problem as well as gather preliminary health and exposure 
data.  Ongoing projects within the Environmental Justice: Partnerships for 
Communication Program are committed to enhancing community participation in 
research studies and facilitating communication among 
environmental/occupational health researchers, community health care 
providers, and community members.  Methods utilized in these projects 
include:

o Assessment and/or surveys of environmental/occupational hazard(s).

o Community based exposure assessment of environmental pollutants and 
hazards.

o Characterization and evaluation of the distribution and health impact of 
environmental contaminants and occupational hazards.

o Provision of environmental health and toxic exposure training for health 
care providers.

o Development of culturally and linguistically appropriate education and 
communication materials.

o Development and implementation of exposure reduction/pollution prevention 
strategies.

o Evaluation of training and education materials and assessment of policy 
impact.

Objectives and Scope

One component of the mission of the NIEHS and the NIOSH is to promote 
research aimed at achieving environmental justice by identifying and 
addressing disproportionately high and adverse effects of environmental 
pollutants and occupational hazards on human health in low income and 
minority populations.  The two main objectives of this program are to: 
establish methods for linking members of a community, who are directly 
affected by adverse environmental/occupational conditions, with researchers 
and health care providers; and enable this partnership to develop appropriate 
research strategies to address environmental/occupational health problems of 
concern to impact public health and health policy.  Development of such 
community-based strategies to address these health problems requires 
approaches that are not typically familiar to environmental, occupational and 
medical research communities.  Customary approaches to risk assessment and 
management often neglect the knowledge and experience of at risk populations 
and the socio-cultural context of environmental/occupational hazards.  The 
distinctive needs of individual communities are only rarely considered in 
identifying environmental or occupational health problems and devising 
appropriate disease and pollution prevention tactics.  In addition, for 
occupational health a community setting may be the workplace where the social 
and political dynamics are very different from a residential community 
setting.  Occupational health researchers generally construct their exposure 
assessments based on observations and measurements in the workplace and/or 
documents provided by the employers.  In the residential community setting 
many of these exposure sources may be unavailable.  Underserved populations 
are often diverse, fragmented, and isolated, making it difficult to obtain 
their input and to integrate their concerns in decision-making processes.  
Assays of the health effects of environmental pollution, as well as 
regulations based on such assays, are often performed with little or no input 
from the affected community.  The purpose of this program is to institute 
mechanisms to bridge this communication gap.  Once communication and 
collaboration have been achieved, researchers and community members should 
then develop a research agenda to identify and assess environmental or 
occupational risks.  Establishing and maintaining trust among all partners is 
important throughout the process, as it will enhance the capacity to collect 
preliminary health and exposure data.  Since the ultimate goal of this 
program is to improve health in these populations and reduce the burden of 
disease, participation of the affected community is essential for both the 
identification of health risks as well as the effective implementation of 
policies to reduce exposure.  Applicants are therefore expected to create 
equitable partnerships among researchers in environmental/occupational 
health, health care providers, and representatives of low income or medically 
underserved communities affected by environmental health problems.  

Types of activities that may be proposed include, but are not limited to:

o Develop efficacious methods for risk communication in low-income and 
underserved communities unfavorably impacted by environmental/occupational 
hazards.

o Develop community-based, culturally sensitive educational programs to 
mitigate adverse health effects from environmental toxicants or occupational 
hazards in low-income and underserved communities.

o Carry out community-based training to increase environmental and/or 
occupational health literacy, i.e., increase awareness of the public, in such 
neighborhoods.

o Train and educate neighborhood health care professionals in the prevention, 
diagnosis, and treatment of disorders having an etiology related to exposure 
to hazardous substances, i.e., increase awareness of health care providers.  
These providers should have a direct role in assisting a community affected 
by exposure to an environmental or occupational hazard.

o Develop a research agenda to measure population exposure and/or quantify 
human health impacts.  We wish to encourage a broad, comprehensive approach 
to this problem that emphasizes both education and research.  

o Include a comprehensive plan to have an ongoing evaluation from the 
inception of the project to its completion – including but not limited to an 
assessment of the partnership among various team members and policy and 
public health impact.

o Suggest recommendations for future activities, beyond the period of current 
funding, to assure continued participation of community members in research 
and service programs addressing environmental injustices. 

The following four elements must be included in applications submitted in 
response to this RFA.  Applications lacking any one of the following elements 
will be considered non-responsive.  Potential applicants are strongly 
encouraged to consult Program Staff listed under WHERE TO SEND INQUIRIES 
about their capacity to address each of these factors.  The required four 
elements for each application are:

o Assessment Plan. Identify means of establishing effective input from an 
underserved community affected by an environmental/occupational hazard.  
Applicants are encouraged to create a community-based advisory board or 
steering committee to facilitate planning, education, outreach, 
dissemination, and evaluation efforts.  Input could be obtained directly from 
members of a community affected by an environmental toxicant and/or 
occupational hazard as well as from representatives of such groups as 
community and neighborhood associations, churches, public housing resident 
councils, community health centers, local public health service departments, 
and minority educational institutions.  An objective assessment process 
should be designed to:

- Identify priority areas in environmental/occupational health as perceived 
by community members.
- Identify and characterize environmental/occupational stressors of concern.
- Develop a consensus among community members about plausible approaches.
- Build upon existing experience and knowledge within the community.
- Detect any potential constraints in implementing the project.

o Implementation Plan. 
- Develop appropriate education and communication modules. 
- Develop research, intervention and policy approaches.  For example, 
projects to collect and analyze exposure/health data would be appropriate and 
are encouraged.
- Training/Educational programs in the community and at universities.

o Communication and Dissemination Plan. 
- Methods and process for dissemination within the community.
- Method for community members to have a voice that reaches researchers and 
health care providers.
- Policy/regulatory impact of the activities carried by this project.

o Evaluation Plan. Evaluation of the project's public health impact should be 
integral to the project. Both process and outcome measures should be 
addressed.  A procedure must be developed to have an ongoing evaluation of 
the project, including the usefulness of the project's education, 
communication and research activities.  

- Process evaluation, includes, but is not limited to:
1. Assessment of interaction and association among various partners in the 
project.
2. Assessment of the process of developing and disseminating the education 
and training information.
3. The degree of capacity building and leadership training in the community, 
of researchers, and health care providers.

- Outcome evaluation, includes, but is not limited to: 
1. Assessment of the usefulness of the information disseminated at meetings, 
through brochures, etc, to influence the public and health care providers 
knowledge and behavior.
2. Assessment of hazardous environmental or occupational exposures and the 
capacity of the project to reduce such exposures. 
3. Policy, regulatory or legislative impact that results in improved public 
health. 
4. Assessment of public health outcomes as measured, for example, by lower 
rates of exposure to pesticides or/and allergens, etc. 
5. Assessment of whether and to what extent the project has been capable of 
translating research in environmental/occupational health to the public to 
develop prevention, education, and training programs.

It is further encouraged that a social scientist be involved in the 
development of quantitative and qualitative tools to assess progress and 
programmatic achievements.  Applications that do not contain both process and 
outcome evaluation components will be considered non-responsive and returned 
to the applicant without review.

All of the above elements are essential to fulfill the education, 
communication, research, and outreach aims of this RFA.  Applicants lacking 
any of the above components will be considered non-responsive.  

It is important to note that award of a grant under this RFA does not imply a 
commitment to future funding of any extensions or new projects planned with 
the support of such a grant.  Separate applications must be submitted for 
such programs, and such applications will be evaluated on the basis of their 
own merits.  

Activities conducted under this RFA should be consistent with Federal 
Executive Order No. 12988 entitled, "Federal Actions to Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations."  For further 
information, see 
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/orders/6640_23.htm.  To the 
extent to which it is practical and permitted by law, grantees shall make 
achieving environmental justice part of their project's mission by 
identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high- and 
adverse human health effects of environmental contaminants on minority, 
low-income, and medically underserved populations, including African, 
Hispanic, Asian, Pacific Islander, and Native American.

MECHANISM OF SUPPORT

This RFA will use the NIH Education Research Program grant (R25) award 
mechanism.  As an applicant you will be solely responsible for planning, 
directing, and executing the proposed project.  This RFA is a one-time 
solicitation.  Future unsolicited, competing-continuation applications based 
on this project will compete with all investigator-initiated applications and 
will be reviewed according to the customary peer review procedures.

This RFA uses the non-modular budgeting format.  Applicants must follow the 
instructions for non-modular research grants applications.

The anticipated award date is July 30, 2004.

FUNDS AVAILABLE

The NIEHS intends to commit approximately $1.67 million in FY04 to fund five 
to six new and/or competitive continuation grants in response to this RFA.  
The NIOSH intends to commit approximately $500,000 in FY04 to fund two to 
three new grants in response to this RFA.  An applicant may request a project 
period of up to four years and a budget for direct costs of up to $225,000 
per year.  Indirect costs will be paid at eight percent of direct costs less 
appropriate exclusions.  This is not a modular grant and a detailed budget is 
expected.  The application should include within its scope the plans for the 
entire length of the grant.  Although the financial plans of the NIEHS and 
NIOSH provide support for this program, awards pursuant to this RFA are 
contingent upon the availability of funds and the receipt of a sufficient 
number of meritorious applications.  

ELIGIBILE INSTITUTIONS

Community-based organizations are especially encouraged to apply.  You may 
submit (an) application(s) if your institution has any of the following 
characteristics: 

o For-profit or non-profit organizations 
o Public or private institutions, such as universities, colleges, hospitals, 
and laboratories 
o Units of State and local governments
o Eligible agencies of the Federal government  
o Domestic 
o Faith-based or community-based organizations

Foreign institutions are not eligible to apply.

Usually, only one award under this RFA will be funded at an institution or 
organization.  Although a single institution or organization must be the 
applicant, a multi-institutional arrangement (consortium) is possible.  Such 
consortia, entailing active participation by more than one organization, are 
encouraged if there is clear evidence of close interaction and responsible 
partnership among the participants.  Competitive continuation application 
from existing grantees in the NIEHS Environmental Justice: Partnerships for 
Communication Program in their fourth year of support will be accepted for 
consideration under this RFA.  Such applications must follow PHS398 
guidelines for competitive renewal, including a progress report.  Such 
applicants are strongly encouraged to contact Program Staff listed under 
WHERE TO SEND INQUIRIES for additional guidance.  

INDIVIDUALS ELIGIBLE TO BECOME PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS   

Any individual with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry 
out the proposed research is invited to work with his/her institution to 
develop an application for support.  Individuals from underrepresented racial 
and ethnic groups, women and individuals with disabilities are always 
encouraged to apply for NIH programs.   

SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS

To encourage applicants to share information gained via these grants, a 
member of each of the three types of required personnel on each project 
(scientist, health care provider, and a member of the community-based 
organization) will be asked to attend an annual meeting in the Research 
Triangle Park, NC area.  Applicants should include such travel in their 
budget requests.

During the four-year project period, the NIEHS may provide supplemental funds 
for logistical arrangement for the annual Environmental Justice grantee 
meeting.  This meeting will convene all the Environmental Justice grantees 
and will serve to inform other Environmental Justice grantees and the 
research community of the progress to-date in developing the program, 
creating educational materials, the process of dissemination, and the 
evaluation program.  NIEHS may provide these supplemental funds to the 
selected host institution, after the receipt of an appropriate application 
and review by Program Staff.  Applicants are still expected to provide travel 
for the three types of required personnel on each project (scientist, health 
care provider, and a member of the community-based organization) in their 
grant budget.

WHERE TO SEND INQUIRIES

We encourage inquiries concerning this RFA 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:

o Direct your questions about scientific/research issues to:

Shobha Srinivasan, Ph.D.
Scientific Program Administrator
Division of Extramural Research and Training
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-21
111 T.W. Alexander Drive
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709
Phone: (919) 541-2506
Fax: (919) 316-4606
Email: sriniva2@niehs.nih.gov

Adele M. Childress, Ph.D., M.S.P.H.
Program Administrator
Office of Extramural Programs
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
1600 Clifton Road, N.E.
Executive Park Building 24, Room 1427, MS E-74
Atlanta, GA 30333
Phone: (404) 498-2509
Fax: (404) 498-2571
Email: ahc0@cdc.gov

o Direct your questions about peer review issues to:

Leroy Worth, Jr., Ph.D.
Scientific Review Administrator
Division of Extramural Research and Training
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-30
111 T.W. Alexander Drive
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709
Telephone:  (919) 541-0670
Fax:  (919) 541-2503
Email: worth@niehs.nih.gov

o Direct your questions about financial or grants management matters to:

Ms. Carolyn Winters
Grants Management Specialist
Division of Extramural Research and Training
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-22
111 T.W. Alexander Drive
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709
Telephone:  (919) 541-7823
Fax:  (919) 541-2860
Email: winters@niehs.nih.gov

Robin Solow
Contracts Management Branch
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
626 Cochrans Mill Road
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15236-0070
Telephone: (412) 386-6428
Email: rsolow@cdc.gov

LETTER OF INTENT
 
Prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes 
the following information:

o Descriptive title of the proposed research
o Name, address, and telephone number of the Principal Investigator
o Names of other key personnel 
o Participating institutions
o Number and title of this RFA 

Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not 
enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information that it 
contains allows NIEHS staff to estimate the potential review workload and 
plan the review.
 
The letter of intent is to be sent by the date listed at the beginning of 
this document.  The letter of intent should be sent to:

Leroy Worth, Jr., Ph.D.
Scientific Review Administrator
Division of Extramural Research and Training 
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-30
111 T.W. Alexander Drive
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709
Telephone:  (919) 541-0670
Fax:  (919) 541-2503
Email: worth@niehs.nih.gov

SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION

Applications must be prepared using the PHS 398 research grant application 
instructions and forms (rev. 5/2001).  The PHS 398 is available at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html in an interactive 
format.  For further assistance contact GrantsInfo, Telephone (301) 435-0714, 
Email: GrantsInfo@nih.gov.
 
USING THE RFA LABEL:  The RFA label available in the PHS 398 (rev. 5/2001) 
application form must be affixed to the bottom of the face page of the 
application.  Type the RFA number on the label.  Failure to use this label 
could result in delayed processing of the application such that it may not 
reach the review committee in time for review.  In addition, the RFA title 
and number must be typed on line 2 of the face page of the application form, 
and the YES box must be marked. The RFA label is also available at: 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/label-bk.pdf.
 
SENDING AN APPLICATION TO THE NIH:  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
Bethesda, MD  20817 (for express/courier service)
 
At the time of submission, two additional copies of the application must be 
sent to:

Leroy Worth, Jr., Ph.D.
Scientific Review Administrator
Division of Extramural Research and Training
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-30
111 T.W. Alexander Drive
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709
79 T.W. Alexander Drive, 4401 Building, 3rd Floor (courier/express service)
Telephone:  (919) 541-0670
Fax:  (919) 541-2503
Email: worth@niehs.nih.gov
 
APPLICATION PROCESSING:  Applications must be received on or before the 
application receipt date listed in the heading of this RFA.  If an 
application is received after that date, it will be returned to the applicant 
without review.  

Although there is no immediate acknowledgement of the receipt of an 
application, applicants are generally notified of the review and funding 
assignment within eight weeks.

The Center for Scientific Review (CSR) will not accept any application in 
response to this RFA that is essentially the same as one currently pending 
initial review, unless the applicant withdraws the pending application.  
However, when a previously unfunded application, originally submitted as an 
investigator-initiated application, is to be submitted in response to an RFA, 
it is to be prepared as a NEW application.  That is the application for the 
RFA must not include an Introduction describing the changes and improvements 
made, and the text must not be marked to indicate the changes.  While the 
investigator may still benefit from the previous review, the RFA application 
is not to state explicitly how.

PEER REVIEW PROCESS  
 
Upon receipt, applications will be reviewed for completeness by the CSR and 
responsiveness by the NIEHS.  Incomplete and/or non-responsive applications 
will be returned to the applicant without further consideration.

Applications that are complete and responsive to the RFA will be evaluated 
for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate peer review group 
convened by the NIEHS in accordance with the review criteria stated below.  
As part of the initial merit review, all applications will:

o Receive a written critique.
o Undergo a process in which only those applications deemed to have the 
highest scientific merit, generally the top half of the applications under 
review, will be discussed and assigned a priority score.
o Receive a second level review by the National Advisory Environmental Health 
Sciences Council.
 
REVIEW CRITERIA

The goals of NIH-supported research are to advance our understanding of 
biological systems, improve the control of disease, and enhance health.  In 
the written comments, reviewers will be asked to discuss the following 
aspects of your application in order to judge the likelihood that the 
proposed research will have a substantial impact on the pursuit of these 
goals: 

o Significance 
o Approach 
o Innovation
o Investigator
o Environment
  
The scientific review group will address and consider each of these criteria 
in assigning your application's overall score, weighting them as appropriate 
for each application.  The application does not need to be strong in all 
categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact and thus 
deserve a high priority score.  For example, an investigator may propose to 
carry out important work that by its nature is not innovative but is 
essential to move a field forward.

(1) SIGNIFICANCE:  Does the project identify key environmental/occupational 
stressors that affect the health and quality of life of people who live in or 
around communities thought to be at risk?  If the aims of the application are 
achieved, to what extent will the project further the goals of improving 
understanding of environmental/occupational hazards and disease 
susceptibility?  If the aims of the application are achieved, how do they 
advance scientific knowledge?  What will be the effect of these studies on 
the concepts or methods that drive this field?

(2) APPROACH:  Are the conceptual framework, design, methods, analyses, and 
evaluation components well developed and integrated, and appropriate to the 
aims of the project?  Are potential problem areas identified and alternative 
tactics suggested?

(3) INNOVATION:  Does the project employ novel concepts, approaches or 
methods?  Are the aims original and innovative?  Does the project challenge 
existing paradigms or develop new methodologies or technologies?  Does the 
project establish a focus and adopt appropriate strategies and procedures for 
information exchange related to environmental/occupational health problems in 
socioeconomically disadvantaged communities?  Does the project have a direct 
impact on the health or quality of life of individuals in affected 
communities (including but not limited to policy and prevention programs), 
e.g., by diminishing exposure to environmental toxicants or occupational 
hazards?

(4) INVESTIGATOR:  Are the investigator and partners appropriately trained 
and well suited to carry out this work?  Is the work proposed appropriate to 
the experience level as the Principal Investigator and to that of other 
researchers?  Is there evidence of access to, interaction with, and input 
from a minority, low-income, or underserved community, whose members' health 
is adversely impacted by an environmental or occupational hazards?  There 
should be evidence of effective involvement of such a community in 
development of the application as well as in conduct of the project.  There 
should be evidence of effective cooperation and interaction in development of 
the application as well as in execution of the project among the three types 
of required personnel: a researcher in environmental/occupational health 
sciences, a health care provider, and a community-based organization in an 
area having an underserved population that is adversely affected by an 
environmental/occupational hazard.  There should be an equitable distribution 
of responsibilities among the three types of required personnel.

(5) ENVIRONMENT:  Does the scientific and community environment in which your 
work will be done contribute to the probability of success?  Is there 
evidence of institutional support commitment as evidenced by provision of 
appropriate resources, services, technical support, and allocation of space? 
Is the approach and methodology proposed to accomplish the project's 
objectives appropriate and adequate?  Has consideration been given to the 
effectiveness of the proposed plan in reaching the target audience?  For 
example, many socioeconomically disadvantaged persons tend not to obtain 
information from the written word.  Low literacy and/or inability to read and 
understand English may be challenges.  Materials may need to be generated 
that are linguistically and culturally appropriate.

ADDITIONAL REVIEW CRITERIA:  In addition to the above criteria, the following 
items will be considered in the determination of scientific merit and the 
priority score:

PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS FROM RESEARCH RISK:  The involvement of human 
subjects and protections from research risk relating to their participation 
in the proposed research will be assessed.  (See criteria included in the 
section of Federal Citations, below).

INCLUSION OF WOMEN, MINORITIES AND CHILDREN IN RESEARCH:  The adequacy of 
plans to include subjects from both genders, all racial and ethnic groups 
(and subgroups), and children as appropriate for the scientific goals of the 
research.  Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects will also be 
evaluated. (See Inclusion Criteria included in the section on Federal 
Citations, below.)

ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

DATA SHARING:  The adequacy of the proposed plan to share data and any 
publication (such as brochures and other materials). 

BUDGET:  The reasonableness of the proposed budget and the requested period 
of support in relation to the proposed research.  In conjunction with the 
consistent and an equitable distribution of responsibilities, there should 
likewise be an equitable distribution of requested financial support among 
the three types of required personnel.

o OTHER REVIEW CRITERIA:  The major review factors listed below will be used 
in evaluation of applications for this RFA:

- EVALUATION:  Plans for evaluation of factors contributing to the project's 
effectiveness.  Evaluations should include a measure of the impact of the 
project on community members' knowledge and awareness of issues and resources 
related to environmental health sciences.  Similarly, evaluation of the 
effectiveness of health care provider training should be conducted.  Both 
process and outcome evaluation tools should be incorporated.  Applications 
without evaluation components will be returned without review.  It is 
imperative to assess whether the project enhances awareness of environmental 
health problems among members of the public and/or health care providers 
living or working in low-income or underserved communities.  

RECEIPT AND REVIEW SCHEDULE

Letter of Intent Receipt Date:  September 17, 2003
Application Receipt Date:  October 17, 2003
Peer Review Date:  February 2004
Council Review:  May 2004
Earliest Anticipated Start Date:  July 30, 2004

AWARD CRITERIA

Award criteria that will be used to make award decisions include:

o Scientific merit (as determined by peer review).
o Availability of funds.
o Programmatic priorities.
 
REQUIRED FEDERAL CITATIONS 

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 

INCLUSION OF WOMEN AND MINORITIES IN CLINICAL RESEARCH:  It is the policy of 
the NIH that women and members of minority groups and their sub-populations 
must be included in all NIH-supported clinical research projects involving 
human subjects 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 read the AMENDMENT "NIH 
Guidelines For Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical 
Research B Amended, October, 2001," published in the NIH Guide for Grants and 
Contracts on October 9, 2001, http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-
files/NOT-OD-02-001.html; a complete copy of the updated Guidelines 
are available at 
http://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 new PHS Form 398; 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 RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS:  
The NIH maintains a policy that children (i.e., individuals under the age of 
21) must be included in all human subjects research, conducted or supported 
by the NIH, unless there are scientific and ethical reasons not to include 
them.  This policy applies to all initial (Type 1) applications submitted for 
receipt dates after October 1, 1998.

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 that is available at 
http://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 proposals for research involving human 
subjects.  You will find this policy announcement in the NIH Guide for Grants 
and Contracts Announcement, dated June 5, 2000, at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-039.html.

PUBLIC ACCESS TO RESEARCH DATA THROUGH THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT:  The 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110 has been revised to 
provide public 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 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/a110/a110_guidance_dec1999.htm.

Applicants may wish to place data collected under this RFA 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.

STANDARDS FOR PRIVACY OF INDIVIDUALLY IDENTIFIABLE HEALTH INFORMATION:  The 
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) 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 DHHS Office for 
Civil Rights (OCR). Those who must comply with the Privacy Rule (classified 
under the Rule as "covered entities") must do so by April 14, 2003  (with the 
exception of small health plans which have an extra year to comply).  

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 
http://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.  
Unless otherwise specified in an NIH solicitation, Internet addresses (URLs) 
should not be used to provide information necessary to the review because 
reviewers are under no obligation to view the Internet sites.  Furthermore, 
we caution reviewers that their anonymity may be compromised when they 
directly access an Internet site.

HEALTHY PEOPLE 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 
RFA 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 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 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 NIH Grants 
Policy Statement can be found at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/policy.htm.

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.

Return to Volume Index

Return to NIH Guide Main Index

	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, RealPlayer, Video or Flash files, see Help Downloading Files.