CDC PUBLIC HEALTH RESEARCH: HEALTH PROTECTION RESEARCH INITIATIVE
CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE IN HEALTH PROMOTION ECONOMICS 
CENTER CORE GRANT (P30)
 
RELEASE DATE:  April 22, 2004 

RFA Number:  RFA-CD-04-004 

EXPIRATION DATE:  June 22, 2004

Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)

PARTICIPATING ORGANIZATION:
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
 (http://www.cdc.gov)

COMPONENTS OF PARTICIPATING ORGANIZATIONS: 
Office of the Director (OD), Office of Science Policy and Technology 
Transfer (OSPTT), Office of Public Health Research (OPHR) 
 (http://www.cdc.gov/od/ads/)

Note: The policies, guidelines, terms, and conditions stated in this 
announcement may differ from those used by NIH.

CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE NUMBER:  93.061
 
LETTER OF INTENT RECEIPT DATE:  May 24, 2004
APPLICATION RECEIPT DATE:  June 21, 2004  
 
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 Center Director
o Special Requirements
o Where to Send Inquiries
o Letter of Intent
o Submitting an Application
o Supplemental Instructions
o Peer Review Process
o Review Criteria
o Additional Considerations
o Receipt Schedule
o Award Criteria
o Required Federal Citations

PURPOSE OF THIS RFA

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Office of Science 
Policy and Technology Transfer (OSPTT), Office of Public Health 
Research (OPHR) announces the availability of FY 2004 funds to provide 
core support for the establishment of Centers of Excellence in Health 
Promotion Economics.  This RFA is a component of the CDC’s FY 2004 
Health Protection Research initiative.  Health protection should be 
interpreted to include activities that 1) promote health and or prevent 
disease, injury, or disability or 2) protect people from health threats 
including infectious, environmental, and terrorist threats.   
Centers of Excellence in Health Promotion Economics will apply economic 
theory and methods to areas that have a high probability of improving 
the efficiency and effectiveness of priority health protection 
activities.  Health promotion economics is defined as the study of the 
relationship between society’s resources and its efforts to promote 
health.  The demand for health promotion-related goods and services 
exceeds the available resources, so means must be devised to allocate 
these resources between competing ends.  Research in health promotion 
economics should be interpreted to include, but not be limited to, that 
which 1) explores economic priorities, barriers and solutions to 
developing, implementing, and evaluating health promotion policies, 
guidelines, recommendations, and programs; 2) examines supply and 
demand for health promotion including examination of market 
imperfections and externalities; and 3) evaluates the cost 
effectiveness and efficiency of such polices and programs.  Health 
promotion focuses on creating policies and developing behaviors that 
result in lowering the risk of disease, injury and disability.  By 
promoting health (through physical activity, diet, etc.) and preventing 
disease, injury, and disability (through the use of seat belts, 
antimicrobial prophylaxis therapy, etc.), people are given the 
opportunity to achieve their expected lifespan with the best possible 
quality of health in every life stage. 
 
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

Background

The large discrepancies between what Americans spend on health and the 
outcomes they experience may stem from how the nation’s health 
knowledge and resources are deployed within the health system and other 
sectors of society.  Most health resources are deployed when people 
seek care for specific diseases and health conditions.  Currently, 
health protection, health promotion, and prevention activities account 
for about 3% of the nation’s investment for health services.
 
CDC has aligned its priorities and investments with those of the 
Department of Health and Human Services to achieve 2 overarching health 
protection goals: 

1) Health promotion/Disease, injury and disability prevention: All 
people will achieve their optimal lifespan with the best possible 
quality of health in every life stage.  The strategy to accomplish this 
goal includes developing the knowledge and tools that integrate 
perspectives from multiple scientific disciplines to focus on health 
evolving in “life stages” over a lifetime (infants, children, 
adolescents, young adults, middle-age adults, and older adults), and in 
all situations (at work, in communities, in school, at home, and at 
play).  Integral to the successful accomplishment of this goal is the 
elimination of health disparities that afflict many people in our 
society. 

2) Preparedness: People in all communities will be protected from 
infectious, environmental, and terrorist threats.  The strategies to 
accomplish this goal include developing the knowledge and tools that 
integrate perspectives from multiple scientific disciplines to focus on 
exposure prevention, rapid detection and diagnosis, investigation, 
containment, and recovery from health threats. 

CDC’s health protection research initiative is designed to support 
achievement of these goals, and will help develop and disseminate the 
knowledge and tools that can be used by individuals, public health 
professionals, health care providers, educators, policy makers, 
businesses, private sector organizations, and others to measurably 
improve the health of Americans and reduce health disparities at all 
life stages and in all settings. 

This RFA focuses specifically on health promotion. 

A major obstacle to giving greater priority to health promotion is the 
fact that there is insufficient evidence on economic factors that 
influence specific programs, practices, and policies that affect health 
decisions made by people and those responsible for health policies and 
programs in the public health, healthcare delivery, and educational 
systems, as well as their counterparts in businesses and other private 
sector enterprise, governments, and governmental agencies.  CDC has 
initiated the establishment of Centers of Excellence in Health 
Promotion Economics as one key component of its public health research 
agenda to address this knowledge gap in health promotion.  A proactive 
approach to health promotion may be economically beneficial.  With more 
than 60% of U.S. adults being overweight or obese, annual U.S. obesity-
attributable medical expenditures are estimated at $75 billion in 2003 
dollars. 

Research Objectives

The primary objective of this funding is to establish Centers of 
Excellence in Health Promotion Economics that would explore economic 
solutions to developing, evaluating, and implementing health promotion 
guidelines, recommendations, programs, and policies; and to evaluate 
their cost-effectiveness, consequently improving upon all aspects of 
health promotion-related efforts.  A Center of Excellence in Health 
Promotion Economics would represent an organization or academic setting 
with a critical mass of researchers and teachers to bring the 
discipline of health economics to the examination, design, 
implementation, and evaluation of health promotion policies and 
programs.  An optimal setting for a Center of Excellence would include 
the following:

o Trans-disciplinary setting with expertise in fields such as public 
  health, economics, epidemiology, demography, biostatistics, and 
  behavioral sciences.
o Access to and established relationships with a variety of entities
  involved in health promotion research and its evaluation,
  translation and implementation, such as the state health
  department, school of public health, other government entities 
  such as the cooperative extension service, businesses, and 
  community organizations.
o Institutional capacity in research and teaching.
  Core faculty in several of the following priority areas:
  econometrics, decision science, health policy, economic 
  evaluation, macroeconomics, management, health care finance,
  industrial engineering, operational research, and environmental 
  health economics.

Strategies

Priority will be given to strategies that employ health promotion 
economics to address major actual causes of death in the United States 
(JAMA. 2004; 291(10):1238-1245), e.g., obesity, diabetes, poor 
nutrition, and lack of adequate physical activity: 

O  Conducting research in health promotion economics includes:
o  Estimating economic burden of disease, determinants of 
   health and health disparities
o  Identifying and examining the role of economic incentives 
   and barriers to health promotion and the adoption of 
   healthy lifestyles
o  Investigating supply and demand for health promotion
   activities including market imperfections and externalities
o  Evaluating the costs and cost-effectiveness of health 
   promotion policies and programs
o  Examining the role of health care financing on the delivery 
   of health promotion programs and interventions
o  Identifying structural solutions to improving health 
   promotion programs within the existing primary health care 
   structure and through linkages between the clinic and the 
   community
o  Examining return on investment in public health and health
   promotion at the macroeconomic level.
O  Providing training in health promotion economics to one or more
   of the following:
o  MPH and PhD students 
o  Medical students,
o  Post-docs (residents and fellows)
o  State and local health departments
o  Community-based organizations
o  Members of the health care delivery system.
O  Linking with health promotion implementers to evaluate the
   cost effectiveness of their activities and to incorporate 
   findings from economic research into programs and policies, 
   thereby improving their effectiveness and efficiency.

MECHANISM OF SUPPORT

This RFA will use the Research Center Core (P30) grant award mechanism.  
The purpose of this mechanism is to support shared resources and 
facilities for a specific area of scientific inquiry by a number of 
investigators who provide an interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary 
approach to a joint research effort or who focus on a common research 
problem.  The Center is funded independently from the currently funded 
projects but is integrated with them to provide support.  

Responsibility for the planning, direction, execution and evaluation of 
the proposed Center will be solely that of the applicant.  The total 
project period for an application submitted in response to this RFA may 
not exceed three years.  This RFA is a one-time solicitation.  The 
earliest anticipated award date is September 30, 2004.

This RFA uses just-in-time concepts.  For details refer to the 
Applicants and Grantee Check lists accessible at URL: 
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/grants/charts/checklists.htm#gjit 

FUNDS AVAILABLE
 
CDC intends to commit approximately $1,000,000 in FY 2004 to fund 1 new 
grant in response to this RFA.  An applicant may request up to three 
consecutive 12-month budget periods within a project period of up to 3 
years.  Although the financial plans of CDC 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.  At this time, it is not known if this RFA 
will be reissued.

Matching funds are not required for this program. 

ELIGIBLE INSTITUTIONS
 
Eligible institutions include: 
o  Public or private academic institution
o  Eligible governmental public health agency
o  Unit of state, county, local, or tribal government
o  Healthcare organization 
o  Research institution 

Foreign institutions are not eligible for the Center program grants.

Institutions eligible for the Core Center grant are those at which 
there are at least three (3) research projects funded by Department of 
Health and Human Services (DHHS) grants from selected mechanisms 
(specifically, R01, R15, R18, R21, P01, P50, or U01) or comparable peer 
reviewed research projects, including those funded by state governments 
or private foundations.  These research projects should be directly 
related to the scientific area of the proposed Center.  Each of these 
projects in the research base must have at least one (1) year of 
committed support remaining at the time of the Center award, i.e., 
funding must continue through September 2005 at a minimum.  A project 
that is in a no-cost extension phase does meet this requirement.  A 
large number of DHHS awards in the scientific area of inquiry would 
strengthen an application. 

An applicant organization may submit only one (1) P30 application. 

Note: Title 2 of the United States Code section 1611 states that an 
organization described in section 501©(4) of the Internal Revenue Code 
that engages in lobbying activities is not eligible to receive Federal 
funds constituting an award, grant, or loan.

INDIVIDUALS ELIGIBLE TO BECOME CENTER DIRECTOR   

The Center Director must have a research, a health-professional 
doctorate, or its equivalent.  Center Directors must be established in 
their field with expertise appropriate to the purpose of this RFA.  
Examples of appropriate career appointments could include faculty 
positions at academic institutions or similar research positions at 
other eligible institutions.  The Center Director should have specific 
authority and responsibility to carry out the proposed project.  
Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as 
individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for CDC 
programs.   

SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
 
The Center must be an identifiable organizational unit within a 
department, school, or college (such as public health, demography, 
biostatistics, economics, business, public finance, behavioral 
sciences, etc.). 

A Health Promotion Economics Core Center grant benefits from an 
interdisciplinary approach. When multiple organizations within an 
institution are represented in the application, clear lines of 
authority and sanction by the appropriate institutional officials must 
be specified.

Each applicant institution must name a Center Director who will be the 
key figure in the administration, management, and evaluation of the 
Center grant.  The Director will be responsible for the organization 
and operation of the Center.  The Director should be experienced in 
conducting research and have demonstrated ability to coordinate, 
integrate, and provide guidance in the establishment of new programs in 
the scientific area of inquiry.  The Director must commit a minimum of 
75% of his or her full professional attention to these tasks.

Funding is intended to support shared resources and facilities (core 
units) that will enhance and extend the effectiveness of research at 
the applicant institution.

CORES

A core is a shared central facility, such as an institute, service, or 
other resource.  The core is directed by an investigator with 
substantial expertise related to the core.  A core facility may be 
proposed that will enhance productivity or in other ways benefit a 
group of investigators to accomplish their stated goals.  An important 
consideration is the degree to which the core facility will be utilized 
by and benefit individual ongoing-funded projects and Center 
investigators and will assist in the development of the scientific area 
of inquiry.  The Center must have a minimum of three cores. 
(Administrative Core and Economics Core must be two of the three.)  In 
a Core Center grant application, it is not sufficient for the applicant 
merely to identify such centralized resources.  Rather, it must be 
demonstrated exactly how each core would augment or enhance the present 
capabilities of the investigators and make new activities possible.  

Administrative Core (Mandatory)

An Administrative Core is mandatory for a Core Center.  The 
Administrative Core should manage the overall activities of the Center.  
This should include the following: 

1.  A specified Director and Associate Director;

2.  A description of the administrative structure; 

3.  A general description of overall facility and institutional 
commitment.

It is expected that the Core Center administrative structure will 
accomplish the following:

1.  Coordinate and integrate the Core Center grant components and 
activities;

2.  Review the utilization of funds, including funds for pilot and 
feasibility studies; and

3.  Provide information to the Core Center Director about the 
activities of the Center's cores.

While the final administrative structure of the Core Center will, for 
the most part, be left to the discretion of the applicant institution, 
the effective development of Center programs requires interaction among 
the Director, the core leaders, the Principal Investigators of research 
projects using the cores, appropriate institutional administrative 
personnel and the staff of the awarding agency. 

An Executive Committee, consisting of the Associate Director and the 
PIs of the cores and the Business Official, should be established to 
assist the Director in making the scientific and administrative 
decisions relating to the Center.  In addition to coordination of the 
Core Center, the Director, with his or her Executive Committee, will be 
responsible for allocation of Core Center funds, the identification and 
selection of key personnel, and the planning and evaluation of Core 
Center activities.

The complex nature of administrative requirements of the Core Centers 
will necessitate the assistance of a person with business management 
expertise.  It is important that such an official be identified and 
directly involved with the fiscal aspects of the Core Center 
application and grant.  An appropriate amount of this individual's time 
and effort must be committed for this purpose.  The institutional 
Business Official should be a member of the Executive Committee.  While 
budget formulation and planning will undoubtedly begin with the 
Director in collaboration with the scientific staff, the Business 
Official must be involved in the process and provide oversight in 
matters of fiscal administration throughout the project period.  The 
Business Official should attend the annual Director's meeting; funds 
should be requested in the budget for this purpose.  Annual and close 
out reports will be required to include evaluation measures as 
specified in the evaluation plan.

An Advisory Committee should be established and composed of scientists 
from within the institution and at least two (2) scientists from 
outside the applicant institution.  This committee may also be used in 
evaluating the overall research programs of the Core Center, the 
effectiveness of communications within the Core Center, and any other 
activities in which problems arise for which expertise is required or 
desirable.  If health disparities or emphasis on culture and ethnicity 
is chosen as a core, it is highly suggested that community 
representation be a part of the Advisory Committee.

The Advisory Committee should meet at least once annually.  However, 
the nature of its responsibilities may require ad hoc meetings at more 
frequent intervals.  A member of the OPHR extramural program staff may 
attend meetings as an observer.  The outcome of the Advisory Committee 
review must be part of the Core Center's annual report to the OPHR.

For the purpose of this RFA, establishment of an Economics Core will be 
mandatory.

o Economics Core (Mandatory)

The Economics Core should be designed to furnish a group of 
investigators with focus to allow them to share data in a manner that 
will enhance the research progress.  The requested resources and 
facilities must facilitate the collaboration and integration of the 
component projects, and support a synthesis of information that would 
not take place if each component core project were given its own 
independent resource facility by itself.  Its aim is to stimulate 
multidisciplinary approaches to joint research efforts.  It should be 
an economics “intellectual hub” around which cooperative and 
interactive research will be supported and stimulated. The use of 
shared resources can increase the efficiency of research by eliminating 
unnecessary duplication, promoting the development of new research 
directions, and promoting research interactions and collaborations.  

Other Core Units (One Mandatory)

The applicant must propose at least one additional core that will 
promote scientific accomplishments that are congruent with the research 
base and the overall themes of the Center.  Support is not allowed for 
cores that only replace or centralize resources supported on individual 
project grants. 

All cores must be well justified, conceptually linked to the scientific 
area of inquiry, and clearly demonstrate how the shared resources will 
enable investigators to conduct their independently funded research 
projects more efficiently and/or more effectively.

Various types of other core units are acceptable.  Examples of possible 
cores that may be proposed include:
 
o Dissemination and Translation Core 

Supports dissemination and translation of economic solutions to 
developing, evaluating and implementing health promotion guidelines, 
recommendations, programs, and policies that influence health decisions 
made by people, schools, businesses, and health care delivery systems.  
Facilitates new skills and techniques as well as enhancing the exchange 
and dissemination of information critical to the scientific area of 
inquiry both within the Core Center and within the broader scientific 
community.

o Analytic Support Core

Provides centralized research equipment and services as well as data 
management functions such as data systems functions, data analysis and 
evaluation, economic and demographic data gathering, and biometry or 
statistical data coordination.  Assistance from econometricians, 
computer experts, biostatisticians, epidemiologists, behavioral 
scientists, and other individuals who can assist or collaborate with 
the participating investigators in conducting surveys and research 
relevant to health promotion research practices and outcomes issues is 
desirable.

o Health Disparities Core

Provides the expertise to facilitate research focusing on health 
disparities, defined as behavioral studies on health conditions, health 
promotion attitudes, and economics including diseases, disorders, and 
such other conditions that are unique to, more serious, or more 
prevalent in sub-populations that are economically disadvantaged and 
medically underserved.  Special populations also include racial and 
ethnic minority groups, generally defined as African Americans, 
Hispanics, Native Americans, Alaska Natives, Hawaiian Islanders, and 
Asian Pacific Islanders.  Health disparities activities may stimulate 
research as well as facilitate the development of current and future 
minority investigators.  If an emphasis on health disparities is 
chosen, it is recommended that community representation be a part of 
the Advisory Committee.

Evaluation Plan

A plan for evaluating progress toward aims and/or goals of each core 
and the overall Core Center is required.  The evaluation must 
articulate how progress has advanced the discipline of health economics 
to the examination, design, implementation, and evaluation of health 
promotion policies and programs.  This plan should include the specific 
criteria and methods that will be used for the evaluation. 

The plan should specify the types of evaluation information that will 
be submitted in the Center's annual progress reports.  At a minimum, 
the evaluation plan is to include numbers of publications by Core 
Center staff.

WHERE TO SEND INQUIRIES

CDC encourages inquiries concerning this RFA and welcomes 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:

Tanja Popovic, M.D., Ph.D., F.A.A.M.
Acting Associate Director of Science
Office of Science Policy and Technology Transfer
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
1600 Clifton Road. N.E., Mailstop D-50
Atlanta, GA  30333
Telephone:  (404) 639-7240
FAX:  (404) 639-7341
Email:  TPopovic@cdc.gov 

o Direct your questions about peer review issues to:

Catherine Spruill
Office of Science Policy and Technology Transfer
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
1600 Clifton Road. N.E., Mailstop D-50
Atlanta, GA  30333
Telephone:  (404) 639-7240
FAX:  (404) 639-7341
Email:  Cspruill@cdc.gov 

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

Sylvia Dawson
Procurements and Grants Office 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Koger Office Park, Colgate Building, Mailstop E-14
2920 Brandywine Road
Atlanta, GA  30341-5539
Telephone:  (770) 488-2771
Email:  Sdawson@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 CDC 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:

Heidi Steele
Office of Science Policy and Technology Transfer
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
1600 Clifton Road. N.E., Mailstop D-50
Atlanta, GA  30333
Telephone:  (770) 488-8612
FAX:  (770) 488-8615
Email:  HSteele@cdc.gov 

SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION

Applications must be prepared using the PHS 398 research grant 
application instructions and forms (rev. 5/2001).  Applications must 
have a DUN and Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) 
number as the Universal Identifier when applying for Federal grants or 
cooperative agreements.  The DUNS number can be obtained by calling 
(866) 705-5711 or through the web site at 
http://www.dunandbradstreet.com/. The DUNS number should be entered on 
line 11 of the face page of the PHS 398 form. The PHS 398 document is 
available in an interactive format at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html.    

The instructions for the Form PHS 398 do not entirely apply to the 
submission of these P30 grant applications.  Accordingly, applicants 
are strongly encouraged to follow the SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS below, 
which have been adapted to accommodate the PHS 398 and the special 
requirements of this RFA.  These instructions include all of the 
information that will be needed by the peer reviewers of these 
applications.  

SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS
 
1. Face Page: Use Form Page 1 as instructed in the PHS 398.  On line 2, 
enter the number and title of this RFA.  Remember to affix the RFA 
label that comes with the PHS 398 to the bottom of the Face Page.

2. Description, Performance Site(s) and Key Personnel: Use Form Page 2 
of the PHS 398 and follow the instructions provided in the PHS 398.

3. Table of Contents:  Provide a detailed Table of Contents organized 
as described below.  This differs from Form Page 3 of the PHS 398.

Content                                 Page Number

o Face Page
o Description, Performance Sites and Key Personnel
o Table of Contents, including List of all Tables and Figures
o Detailed Budget for Initial Budget Period (Cores and 
Pilot/Feasibility 
  Studies)
o Budget for Entire Proposed Project Period (Cores and 
Pilot/Feasibility 
  Studies)
o Budgets Pertaining to Consortium/Contractual Arrangements (if 
  applicable) 
o Budget Justification Pertaining to Consortium/ Contractual 
  Arrangements (if applicable) 
o Biographical Sketch of the Principal Investigator (Center Director)
o Biographical Sketches of All Professional Personnel and Pilot
  Investigators
o List of participating faculty/members of the Center  
o Resources 
o Overview of Center and Description of Research Base
o Economics Core, Budget, and Budget Justification
o Mandatory Core #3, Budget, and Budget Justification
o Optional Core(s), Budget, and Budget Justification
o References
o Letters of Support
o Consortium/Contractual Arrangements
o Checklist
o Appendix Material

4. Detailed Budget for Initial Budget Period: Use Form Page 4 of the 
PHS 398 application kit.  This budget should include total direct costs 
of the Cores. 

5. Budget for Entire Proposed Project Period:  Use Form Page 5 of the 
PHS 398 application kit.  This budget should include total direct costs 
of the Cores for all years requested.

6. Budgets Pertaining to Consortium/Contractual Arrangements:  Use Form 
Pages 4 and 5.  These budgets are included if consortium/contractual 
arrangements are needed. 

7. Budget Justification Pertaining to Consortium/Contractual 
Arrangements:  if applicable. 

8. Biographical Sketch of Principal Investigator (Center Director): Use 
the Biographical Sketch Format Page of the PHS 398 and follow the PHS 
398 instructions.  

9. Biographical Sketches of All Professional Personnel and Pilot 
Investigators:  Use the Biographical Sketch Format Page of the PHS 398 
as above.  This section should include all professional personnel who 
are listed with a percent effort, including consultants and members of 
the External Advisory Committee.  Biographical sketches are also 
required for those who are listed in the research base.  Arrange the 
biographical sketches alphabetically.  These pages should not be 
duplicated in the individual component cores or pilots.

10. Complete List (or Table) of Participating Faculty/Members of the 
Center and the External Advisory Committee:  List members 
alphabetically by name and include for each individual his/her degree, 
institution and department affiliation or equivalent, and research or 
other interest (e.g., research area, training, or education).

11. Resources:  Using the Resources Format Page in the PHS 398 
application kit, describe the relevant resources.  

12. Overview of the Center and Description of the Research Base:  This 
section is limited to 25 pages. 

The Specific Aims should state concisely the scientific area of inquiry 
that will serve as the focus for the Center, and the overall objectives 
of the Center.
 
The Background and Significance section should include a critical 
review and synthesis of relevant research, theory, and methods to 
establish the scientific and public health significance of the proposed 
Center's objectives as described under Specific Aims.  It should also 
provide a detailed rationale and justification for the proposed 
scientific area of inquiry with emphasis on how the institution will 
benefit from the proposed Center.  Plans to develop productive 
collaborations among Center investigators should be highlighted, and 
criteria for designating an investigator as a Center participant 
(investigator) should be defined in terms of the responsibilities and 
privileges associated with a Center investigator.  The justification 
for continuation of an existing Center should also be included in this 
section.

The Preliminary Studies section should provide a detailed description 
and discussion of funded research projects that constitute the proposed 
Center's Research Base, and indicate how these studies support the 
selected scientific theme.  It is helpful to present the Research Base 
studies in table format, specifying for each funded study (a) the title 
and grant number, (b) funding organization, (c) period of committed 
support, (d) direct costs for the project period, (e) current year 
annual direct costs, (f) names and institutional affiliations of the 
principal investigator and co-investigators, and (g) principal 
investigator's percent of committed effort.  The Research Base studies 
and related resources should be described and discussed in sufficient 
detail to support an evaluation of their (a) relevance to the 
scientific area of inquiry, and (b) strengths and limitations as a 
scientific foundation for pursuing the Specific Aims of the proposed 
Center.  Applicants may want to provide similar tables depicting 
pending support for research projects related to the scientific area of 
inquiry and current support for research projects unrelated to this 
theme.  The focus and interrelationships of ongoing research and 
research interests for Center investigators should be documented.  
 
The Overview should also include a description of the qualifications of 
the Center Director.  

13. Administrative Core: 

Provide a Detailed Budget, a Budget for Entire Proposed Project Period, 
and Budget Justification for the Administrative Core: Use Form Pages 4 
and 5 of the PHS 398 application kit.  

The narrative section is limited to 25 pages.  Provide a detailed 
description and discussion of the objectives, functions, organizational 
infrastructure, administrative procedures, key personnel (including the 
Core Director), and resources of the Administrative Core within the 
context of the overall Center. The description should depict the 
relationships and lines of authority by appropriate officials; 
committee structures and membership; and plans for assistance of a 
business official for fiscal matters.  A diagram of the interactions to 
be fostered by the Center is useful in depicting proposed 
interrelationships and collaborations among institutional resources.  
Provide a general overall description of facilities and institutional 
commitment, including letter(s) of institutional commitment, and if 
applicable, a letter from the General Research Center Director.  The 
composition and functions of the External Advisory Committee should be 
delineated.  Also, describe the criteria, methods, and other components 
of the comprehensive evaluation plan for the Center.   

14. Economics Core: Provide information modeled after the instructions 
above.

15. Additional Mandatory Core: Provide information modeled after the 
instructions above.

16. Optional Core(s): Provide information for any optional core modeled 
after the instructions above.

17. References:  Follow the directions and instructions provided in the 
PHS 398 application kit.

18. Letters of Support:  Provide letters of support. 

19. Consortium/Contractual Arrangements:  Follow the directions and 
instructions provided in the PHS 398 application kit.

20. Checklist:  Use Checklist Form Page in the PHS 398 application kit.

21. Appendix Material:  Follow the directions and instructions provided 
in the PHS 398 application kit.

22. Personal Data on Principal Investigator/Program Director:  Use 
Personal Data Form Page in the PHS 398 application kit.  

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: 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:

Heidi Steele
Office of Science Policy and Technology Transfer
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
1600 Clifton Road. N.E., Mailstop D-50
Atlanta, GA  30333
Telephone:  (770) 488-8612
FAX:  (770) 488-8615
Email:  HSteele@cdc.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 8 weeks.
 
Upon receipt, applications will be reviewed for completeness by Center 
for Scientific Review, NIH, and for responsiveness by the Office of 
Public Health Research, CDC. Incomplete applications and applications 
that are not responsive to the eligibility criteria will not be 
reviewed.  Applicants will be notified that their applications did not 
meet submission requirements.

PEER REVIEW PROCESS  
 
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 CDC in accordance with the review criteria 
stated below.  CDC uses a peer review process modeled after that of the 
NIH, including a streamline review process, essentially as spelled out 
in the website located at: http://www.csr.nih.gov/REVIEW/streamln.htm 

As part of the initial merit review, all applications will:
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 written critique.

Applications in the upper half will receive a secondary review by the 
secondary review committee.

REVIEW CRITERIA

The goals of CDC-supported research in Centers for Excellence in Health 
Promotion Economics are 1) to explore economic priorities, barriers and 
solutions to developing, evaluating, and implementing health promotion 
guidelines, recommendations, programs and policies; and 2) to evaluate 
the cost effectiveness of such policies and programs.  Health promotion 
policies and programs focus on creating environments and developing 
behaviors that result in lowering the risk of disease, injury, and 
disability.  By promoting health and preventing disease, injury, and 
disability, people are given the opportunity to achieve their expected 
lifespan with the best possible quality of health in every life stage. 

In the written comments, reviewers will be asked to give careful 
consideration to the information in the SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS and CORE 
sections of the RFA and the review criteria listed below in order to 
judge the likelihood that the proposed Center 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 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.
 
Overall Center Grant Application

1.  The overall scientific merit and the potential of the Center for 
making a significant contribution to achieving the goals of CDC. 

2.  The scientific gain from linking the research projects in a Center 
grant, i.e., the degree of interrelatedness and synergism among the 
components of the Center.

3.  The qualifications of the Center co-Directors and other key 
investigators and the commitment of participating investigators to a 
common goal, to the science focus, and to collaboration.

4.  The adequacy of the available resources and the quality of and 
potential for the research environment. 

5.  The commitment of the institution to the Center in terms of space, 
resources, administrative authority, and other necessary support, e.g., 
donated faculty time, use of equipment, and the extent to which the 
Center is recognized as a major element within the organizational 
structure of the institution.

6.  The plans for developmental activities, including recruitment and 
expansion, insofar as these are justified by the proposed research 
program.

7.  Evidence of the extent to which the planning, organization, 
structure, and design of the proposed Center and activities reflect a 
genuine collaboration within and across disciplines.

8.  Appropriateness of the requested budget for the work proposed.

Research Base

1.  Focus and depth of funded investigations that are currently in 
progress.

2.  Presence of current and emerging collaborations and interactions 
among investigators with common research interests within the area of 
scientific inquiry, and among the investigators within the research 
base.

3.  Impact that funded investigators have made in their respective 
fields, as indicated by publications and other factors.

4.  The qualifications, experience, and commitment of the Center 
investigators responsible for the individual research projects, and 
their willingness to collaborate with each other.

5.  The appropriateness of the investigators as participants of the 
Center, and whether their activities warrant core support.

Administrative Core 

1.  The adequacy of the Administrative Core to manage the overall 
activities of the Center.

2.  The appropriateness and relevance of the proposed Core and the 
modes of operation, facilities, and potential for contribution to 
ongoing health promotion economics research.

3.  Appropriate justification for the Core, including the duplication 
of existing resources or services and anticipated future use of the 
Core.

4.  The qualifications of the Director of the Administrative Core. 

5.  The adequacy of the multiple aspects related to the administrative 
structure for the Center, including the provision of scientific and 
administrative leadership for the Center; strategies to promote 
scientific planning, interaction, implementation, and evaluation; and 
arrangements for the fiscal management of the grant.

6.  The proposed composition and functions of the Executive Committee 
to support the proposed activities of the Center.  

7.  The proposed composition and function of the Advisory Committee to 
support the proposed activities of the Center.

Other Individual Cores

1.  The appropriateness and relevance of each proposed core and the 
modes of operation, facilities, and potential for contribution to 
ongoing health promotion economics research.

2.  The qualifications of the Director of each core.

3.  The relevance and importance of the core to advance the scientific 
area of inquiry.

4.  Evidence of collaborative and/or interdisciplinary research.  

5.  The appropriateness of the justification for each core.  
Considerations include the duplication of existing resources or 
services and anticipated future use of each core.

6.  The suitability of the facilities for the proposed research, 
including the availability of required special resources.

7.  The inclusion of community representation as part of the Advisory 
Committee for the Health Disparities Core (if included).

ADDITIONAL REVIEW CRITERIA

In addition to the above criteria, in accordance with DHHS policy, all 
applications will also be reviewed with respect to the following:

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.  This will not 
be scored; however, an application can be disapproved if the research 
risks are sufficiently serious and protection against risks is so 
inadequate as to make the entire application unacceptable.  (See 
criteria included in the section on Federal Citations, below).

INCLUSION OF WOMEN, MINORITIES AND CHILDREN IN RESEARCH: The adequacy 
of plans to address the CDC policy requirements regarding the inclusion 
of women, racial and ethnic groups (and subgroups), as appropriate for 
the scientific goals of the research. Review criteria include: (1)  The 
proposed plan for the inclusion of both sexes and racial and ethnic 
minority populations for appropriate representation; (2) The proposed 
justification when representation is limited or absent; (3) A statement 
as to whether the design of the study is adequate to measure 
differences when warranted; and (4) A statement as to whether the plans 
for recruitment and outreach for study participants include the process 
of establishing partnerships with community(ies) and recognition of 
mutual benefits. Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects 
will also be evaluated. (See Inclusion Criteria in the sections on 
Federal Citations, below). 

CARE AND USE OF VERTEBRATE ANIMALS IN RESEARCH: If vertebrate animals 
are to be used in the project, the five items described under Section f 
of the PHS 398 research grant application instructions (rev. 5/2001) 
will be assessed.  

ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS 

DATA SHARING:  CDC expects researchers who are supported by CDC funding 
to make their data available for analysis by other public health 
researchers and include a data sharing plan in their application.  CDC 
requires that mechanisms for, and costs of, data sharing be included in 
contracts, cooperative agreements, and applications for grants.  CDC 
reviewers must check whether applications for CDC funds include 
mechanisms for, and costs of, sharing data.  The costs of sharing or 
archiving data may be included in the amount of funds requested in 
applications for first-time or continuation funds.  Applicants for CDC 
funds who incorporate data release into their study designs can (1) 
readily and economically set up procedures for protecting the 
identities of research subjects and (2) produce useful data with 
appropriate documentation.  Awardees who fail to release data in a 
timely fashion will be subject to procedures normally used to address 
lack of performance (e.g., reduction in funding, restriction of funds, 
or grant termination).  Researchers who contend that the data they 
collect or produce are not appropriate for release must justify that 
contention in their applications for CDC funds.  The reasonableness of 
the data sharing plan or the rationale for not sharing research data 
will be assessed by the reviewers.  However, reviewers will not factor 
the proposed data sharing plan into the determination of scientific 
merit or priority score.  CDC’s policy is available at: 
http://www.cdc.gov/od/ads/pol-385.htm

BUDGET:  The reasonableness of the proposed budget and the requested 
period of support in relation to the proposed research.

RECEIPT SCHEDULE

Letter of Intent Receipt Date: May 24, 2004
Application Receipt Date: June 21, 2004
Earliest Anticipated Award Date:  September 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 

For full explanation of additional federal citations required for 
applications to this RFA see: http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/ARs.htm 

HUMAN SUBJECTS PROTECTION: Federal regulations (45 CFR Part 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 PUBLIC HEALTH RESEARCH: It is the 
policy of CDC to ensure that individuals of both sexes and the various 
racial and ethnic groups will be included in all CDC-supported studies 
involving human subjects, whenever feasible and appropriate.  
Furthermore, it is CDC policy to identify significant gaps in knowledge 
about health problems that affect women and racial and ethnic minority 
populations and to encourage studies which address these problems. 
Policy available in the Federal Register volume 60 number 179, 
September 15, 1995, page 47948-51.

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 http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-005.html.  
Only research using hESC lines that are registered in the 
NIH Human Embryonic Stem Cell Registry will be eligible for Federal 
funding (see http://escr.nih.gov).   It is the responsibility of the 
applicant to provide, in the project description and elsewhere in the 
application as appropriate, the official NIH identifier(s) for the hESC 
line(s) to be used in the proposed research.  Applications that do not 
provide this information will be returned without review. 

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. Guidance is 
available 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). 
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 CDC GRANT APPLICATIONS OR APPENDICES: All applications and 
proposals for CDC funding must be self-contained within specified page 
limitations.  Unless otherwise specified in a CDC 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 CDC 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.healthypeople.gov/.

AUTHORITY AND REGULATIONS: Awards are made under authorization of 
Sections 301 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241 
and 284) and administered under Federal Regulations 42 CFR 52 and 45 
CFR Parts 74 and 92.  This RFA is not subject to the intergovernmental 
review requirements of Executive Order 12372.

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.

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