FY 2004 FUNDING AND OPERATING
GUIDELINES
National Heart, Lung, and Blood
Institute National Institutes of Health
Archive Edition
For reference,
the following editions are available:
FY 2009
FY 2008 Archive
FY 2007 Archive
FY 2006 Archive
FY 2005 Archive
FY 2004 Archive
GOALS
The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) will continue
to apply National Institutes of Health (NIH) cost management guidelines in
making Research Project Grant (RPG) awards. FUNDING AND OPERATING GUIDELINES
For the period from January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2003 the NIH salary
cap was $171,900. Effective January 1, 2004 the salary cap increased
to $174,500 On March 3, 2004 as a result of an Executive Order
the salary cap was increased from $174,500 to 175,700 and will
result in additional funds being awarded to only those new (Type
1) grants in FY 2004 that qualify according to NIH guidelines
available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-04-034.html
.Competing renewals (Type 2) and non-competing continuations (Type
5) will not have additional funds awarded for this purpose, however,
funds may be rebudgeted to cover institutional base salaries that are
within the new salary cap.
The
NHLBI will use the following guidelines for funding RPGs:
New (Type 1) Research Project Grants:
The NHLBI policy for new grants is to award them at the
Council recommended level except for specific programmatic and administrative
adjustments. Awards will be modular for all applications that do not exceed
$250,000 direct costs in any given year of support in the recommended
competitive segment and categorical for those that exceed $250,000 in any year
of support in the recommended competitive segment.
Competing Renewal (Type 2) Research Project and MERIT Extension
(Type 4) Awards:
The
NHLBI policy for competing renewal and MERIT
extension grants that will be awarded in Fiscal Year 2004 differs
depending upon the nature of the award in the preceding competitive
segment and the likely form of the award for a competitive renewal. Please
note that if the proposed award would result in a reduction greater than
25 percent from the Council recommended level, then NHLBI program staff will
contact the Principal Investigator and the applicant institution
before an award is issued to obtain: either (a) a statement that the approved
aims and objectives can be accomplished within the proposed level of support,
or (b) a revised statement of aims and revised budget for the proposed
level of support.
Investigators of First
Independent Research Support and Transition (R29)
awards who competing for renewal as regular
research grants are considered new (Type 1) awards for funding purposes
and are not subject to the limitations on Type 2 awards described in
the following.
Categorical
to Categorical:
For competing renewal and MERIT
extension grants that were categorical awards in the preceding competitive
segment and will be in excess of $250,000 direct costs in any given year in the
recommended competitive segment, the Institute will award at the Council
recommended direct cost up to a maximum of 10 percent above the level of the
last noncompeting award of the preceding competitive segment, except for
specific programmatic and administrative adjustments that may be warranted. The
10 percent maximum will only be exceeded to accommodate non-recurring equipment
costs or F&A costs associated with the introduction of new
consortia.
Categorical to Modular:
For competing renewal and MERIT extension grants that were categorical awards
in the preceding competitive segment and will be no more than $250,000 direct
costs in any given year in the recommended competitive segment, the Institute
will award at the Council recommended direct cost up to a maximum of 10 percent
above the level of the last noncompeting award of the preceding competitive
segment rounded up to the next module. For example, if the last noncompeting
direct cost award was $150,000, a 10 percent escalation would be $165,000. As a
result, the applicant would be allowed to round up to the next module, and
request $175,000 in direct costs. The cap will only be exceeded to accommodate
non-recurring equipment costs or F&A costs associated with the introduction of new
consortia, which will also be rounded up to the next module. For
example, if requested equipment costs $15,000, a one-time request for an
additional module may be made. However, if one-time equipment costs result in
direct costs in excess of $250,000, the award will be made as categorical and
so actual equipment costs will be awarded.
Modular to Modular:
For competing
renewal and MERIT extension grants that were modular awards in the preceding
competitive segment and will be no more than $250,000 direct costs in any given
year in the recommended competitive segment, the Institute will award at the
Council recommended direct cost up to a maximum number of modules specified as
follows:
If the previous award is 6 or fewer modules, the competing
renewal may be one module more than the previous award. For example, if the
last noncompeting direct cost award was $150,000 (6 modules), the applicant
would be allowed to apply for $175,000 (7 modules).
If the previous
award is 7 or 8 modules, the competing renewal may be two more modules than the
previous award. For example, if the last noncompeting direct cost award was
$200,000 (8 modules), the applicant would be allowed to apply for $250,000 (10
modules).
These modular caps will only be exceeded to accommodate
non-recurring equipment costs or F&A costs associated
with the introduction of new consortia, which will also be rounded up to
the next module. For example, if requested equipment costs $15,000, a one-time
request for an additional module may be made. However, if one-time equipment
costs result in direct costs in excess of $250,000, the award will be made as
categorical and so actual equipment costs will be awarded.
Modular to Categorical:
If the previous award is 9 or 10 modules, any requested increase will cause the
competing renewal to be awarded as categorical. In all such cases, the
Institute will award at the Council recommended direct cost up to a maximum of
10 percent above the level of the last noncompeting award of the preceding
competitive segment, except for specific programmatic and administrative
adjustments that may be warranted. The 10 percent maximum will only be exceeded
to accommodate non-recurring equipment costs or F&A costs associated with the introduction of new
consortia.
.
Program Project Grants (Type 1 and Type
2):
Type 1: The direct cost award will not exceed
$1,450,000. Facilities and Administrative (F&A) Costs associated
with subcontracts are NOT included in the $1,450,000.
Annual increases in non-competing years are allowed at 3 percent
per year.
Type 2: The direct
cost award will not exceed $1,450,000 or 10 percent
more than the recommended amount shown on the
Notice of Grant Award for the last noncompetitive
year, whichever is greater. Facilities and Administrative
(F&A)
Costs associated with subcontracts are NOT included
in the calculation. Annual increases in non-competing
years are allowed at 3 percent per year.
Noncompeting Renewal (Type 5) Grants:
The Institute will award the recommended level
for FY 2004 reflected on the FY 2003 award notice.
However, the Institute retains the right to reduce
such a level when necessary and appropriate.
For example, such a reduction would be made to eliminate any overlapping
support identified.
Future Year
Commitments on FY 2004 New and Competing Renewal
Awards:
Generally,
future year commitments on the Notice of Grant Award will reflect an annual 3
percent escalation on recurring costs (e.g., Personnel, Supplies). The annual 3
percent escalation does not apply to Modular Grants.
DURATION OF GRANTS
To
achieve an average length of four years, the NHLBI will calculate the average
length of research project grants awarded at each Council. To reach the average
length of four years, the Institute will reduce research project grants
recommended for five years to four years beginning with those grants with the
least favorable percentile scores and continuing to those with the most
favorable percentile scores. With this approach grants recommended for four
years will not be reduced to three years by the Institute.
|