HIV/Aging Pilot Program

Concept Proposal Instructions

Concept Proposals must be submitted electronically in one, single Adobe PDF file via the R33 HIV and Aging Submission Form on the CFAR Developmental Core Page (https://www.uab.edu/medicine/cfar/index.php?option=com_rsform&view=rsform&formId=13).

The Concept Proposal should be uploaded using the link above in a single Adobe PDF file, prepared in the order listed below. A cover letter is not required. Only one concept study may be submitted per lead investigator.

1. Two-page concept proposal outlining the hypotheses, specific aims, brief preliminary data (if any), and brief research design. Concepts should specifically address scientific merit, investigator, significance, approach, and innovation. References are not included in the two pages.
2. Biographical Sketch for the applicant (SF424 (R&R) Instructions and example forms can be found here: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/forms/biosketch.htm) and all co-investigators.

Review Criteria for Concept Proposals

A Scientific Selection Committee (SSC) will review the Concept Proposals. Criteria for selection in the Concept Proposal phase are primarily based upon the scientific merit, investigator, significance, approach, and innovation, as follows:

• Scientific Merit – Refers to scoring on the specific criteria below in relation to previous studies, current on-going studies, and other proposals received.
• Significance – What will be the potential effect of these studies on the concepts or methods that drive the field of research? Does the study address an important problem consistent with the objective to advance our understanding of HIV in the aging population? If the aims are achieved, how will scientific knowledge be advanced?
• Investigator – Are the PI, mentor(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? Do the PI and other investigators have appropriate experience and training? If the project is collaborative, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise, and are there both OAIC and CFAR researchers involved?
• Approach – Are the conceptual framework, design, methods, and statistical analysis plan adequately developed, well integrated and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternatives? Does the study design account appropriately for differences by sex or gender, if applicable?
• 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?

Researchers whose proposals are selected for the full proposal competition phase will be notified by email on or around December 17, 2021 and will have ~10 weeks to prepare and submit a full proposal.

Budget Development Guidelines and Restrictions

1. Maximum total costs (direct and indirect) are allowed up to $40,000. Competitive investigators are strongly encouraged to obtain waivers for indirect costs and/or matching local funds as a sign of institutional commitment.
2. Travel to the OAIC Annual conference, or similar HIV conference for those coming from a geroscience background, is provided by this funding mechanism and should not be included in the budget. Budgeting for travel to other conferences to present project research results is allowable and encouraged (travel budget limited to no more than $2000).
3. Requested support for project collaborators who are NOT at the same institution as the awardee must be listed as consultant costs. If the collaborator cannot accept consultancy fees, a subcontract must be issued to their institution. These costs must be listed in the detailed budget as consortium costs with applicable indirect costs included.
4. No international components will be allowed through this mechanism.
5. Costs associated with Institutional Review Board (IRB) review of human research protocols, or Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) review of animal research protocols, are not allowable as direct charges.
6. Awardees who have support from K awards should discuss eligibility issues with their program officers and with institutional officials as eligibility may vary by NIH sponsor for the K award and institutional policies. The staff of this mechanism is not able to determine eligibility for K awardees.
7. All costs must conform to the NIH Grants Policy Statement (GPS) and applicable U.S. Office of Management and Budget OMB circulars for necessity and reasonability, allocability, conformance and consistency, as well as allowability. Please follow the link below to section 7.2 cost principles section of the NIH Grants Policy Statement.

Review Criteria for Full Proposals

Reviewers will provide a written critique based on the evaluation criteria listed below, goals of this R33, and clarity of how funding will lead to subsequent grant applications and research productivity to yield an overall impact score.

After the review meeting, written critiques will be provided to the applicants regardless of success.

The evaluation criteria include:

• Significance – What will be the potential effect of these studies on the concepts or methods that drive the field of research? Does the study address an important problem consistent with the objective to advance our understanding of HIV in the aging population? If the aims are achieved, how will scientific knowledge be advanced?
• Investigator – Are the PI, mentor(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? Do the PI and other investigators have appropriate experience and training? If the project is collaborative, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise, and are there both OAIC and CFAR researchers involved?
• Approach – Are the conceptual framework, design, methods, and statistical analysis plan adequately developed, well integrated and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternatives? Does the study design account appropriately for differences by sex or gender, if applicable?
• 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?
• Environment – Do the proposed methods take advantage of the unique environment and unique populations where appropriate? Are useful collaborative arrangements between resources in the institution(s) utilized where appropriate and described adequately?

Review Committee: Applications will be reviewed by the Application Research Committee, consisting of CFAR and OAIC/MBI/NSC Investigators, with procedures analogous to an NIH Study Section.

Each application will have a primary, secondary, and biostatistical reviewer (where appropriate).

The reviewers will be asked to summarize the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal based on all of the above criteria.

Each project is scored according to the NIH scoring system using overall impact as the metric for success.

Release of Funding for Successful Applicants

Funding will be awarded via a subcontract from University of Alabama at Birmingham.

All questions regarding the awarding of funding should be directed to the contact listed in the notice of award.

Prior to the awarding of funding, the following information should be provided, if applicable:

• Animal Care and Institutional Review Board approvals, if applicable, must be obtained prior to receipt of an award,
• these are not required to submit an application.
• Prior to funding, a copy of all Institutional Biohazard, Animal Care and Institutional Review Board (IRB) approvals must be forwarded to the post-award administrator.
• Prior to receipt of an award involving human subjects, IRB approval from all participating sites and human subjects training certification for all key personnel will be required.

For more information about human subjects approval, see: http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/ and https://www.niaid.nih.gov/grants-contracts/human-subjects.

For more information on animal care approvals, see: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/olaw.htm and https://www.niaid.nih.gov/grants-contracts/research-vertebrate-animals