RFA-CE-24-034 QA_FINAL.pdf

RFA-CE-24-034; The CDC’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control | Rigorous Evaluation of Policies for their Impacts on the Primary Prevention of Multiple Forms of Violence (Co-Ag) | Questions and Answers Received | Pre application call 10/30/2023

Attendees: 20 attendees

Pre-Application Call

1. What kinds of evaluation are eligible for consideration?

• Answer: This funding opportunity is intended to support evaluations that are designed to detect whether any measured changes in multiple forms of violence can be attributed to the selected policy. To this end, applicants are expected to employ the most rigorous research design feasible to examine the impact of previously or currently implemented federal, state, local, tribal, or organizational policies on two or more forms of violence and inequities in rates of violence affecting specific populations in the United States. For the purpose of this announcement, rigorous evaluation designs include those that utilize experimental (i.e., randomized controlled trials) or quasi-experimental designs (e.g., comparative interrupted time series design, event study, stepped wedge, designs using propensity-score matching).

CDC is most interested in the evaluations that gauge whether changes in the outcome of interest can specifically be attributed to a policy and builds the evidence base for those specific types of approaches. All applicants are expected to provide a justification for the proposed design and data analysis plans are appropriate to evaluate the impact of the strategy. Please refer to the Research Design on page 17 of the NOFO for more information on CDC’s policy process and website information.

2. Where should we send letters of intent?

• Answer: Please send all letters of intent to Dr. Carlisha Gentles at CGentles@cdc.gov.

3. Is the letter of intent required? Will the submission of my letter of intent impact scoring of my application?

• Answer: The letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not impact the scoring of an application. The information that it contains assists NCIPC with planning for scientific and technical merit peer review. More information on the Letter of Intent can be found on page 30 of the NOFO.

4. Qualifications for the principal investigator discuss documenting expertise in areas of substance abuse, however, given the NOFO responsiveness criteria given earlier during this call, can we assume that substance abuse is not relevant in regard to eligibility criteria?

• Answer: That is correct. That was a mistake printed in the NOFO and will be corrected in the amended NOFO. Principal investigator qualifications should instead include expertise documentation of violence prevention experience, and/or documentation of conducting mailto:CGentles@cdc.gov ideologic research or evaluation which would be listed clearly in the SF424 biosketch of the applicant principal investigator or co-investigator.

5. Is the expected appendix page limit 25 pages with the research strategy or is the expected 25-page page limit for the appendix alone?

• Answer: The research plan narrative is not included within the 25-page limit and supporting materials for the research plan narrative in the appendix may not exceed 25 pages. Any pages that go over the page limit will be removed and not forwarded to Peer Review. Please refer to page 33 of the NOFO on Page Limitations for more information.

6. The budget for the project period is a maximum of $350,000 for the first 12 months, are applicants expected to submit a full budget for the requested timeline or only for the first 12 months?

• Answer: Applicants are expected to submit a full budget justification for each year that they are expecting funding. For more information on Budget Preparation Guidance, please refer to page 44 of the NOFO.

7. Are applicants expected to attend one reverse site visit for their entire three-year project period or one reverse site visit each year?

• Answer: Applicants are expected to comply to one reverse site visit each year for a three-year project period. With many of our current awards, CDC engages in virtual site visits and provide more specific information to each grantee as they are awarded. Please review Reverse Site Visit information on page 23 of the NOFO for more information.

8. What are the major differences between a research cooperative agreement (co-ag) and a typical research grant (R01)?

• Answer: One primary difference is that research cooperative agreement awardees provide technical assistance on scientific and programmatic stewardship of the award. For a research grants (R01), the funded researcher independently directs the project and CDC provides support with administrative, programmatic, and scientific requirements. . Please review page 23 of the NOFO for more guidance on this type of funding mechanism and page 52 for cooperative agreement terms and conditions.

9. What kind of CDC involvement is anticipated at various parts in the research project? Will CDC propose changes to the evaluation plan or other research activities?

• Answer: CDC involvement is dependent on each application specifically. Once the award is funded, recipients will receive information on how CDC intends to be involved in the awarded project specifically. Further discussion with the specified scientific collaborator may be made about the potential improvement to be in alignment of the scientific intent of the funding announcement. Please review page 52 of the NOFO for more information on cooperative agreement Terms and Conditions.

10. I am reaching out to you for some potential insight on the nature of my proposal and whether it is appropriate for your center and this mechanism. Would you have a few minutes to discuss by phone?

• Answer: Unfortunately, we are not able to speak to other funding opportunities or mechanisms that may be appropriate for projects like yours. Please consider reviewing opportunities on grants.gov to see if there are any other opportunities that align with your work. Here are some sections of the NOFO that can assist in developing your application: To get a detailed description of the intent of this NOFO, please especially review the Section I. Funding Opportunity Description, 1. Background and Purpose section. Please also review Section III. Eligibility Information, 5. Responsiveness for details on what constitutes a responsive application. Also, Section V. Application Review Information is a good section to consult regarding the scientific review criteria.

11. We are hoping to add a colleague as a Co-Investigator on the project, but we are not sure that we will get their institutional paperwork in time for the December 1 submission date. Is it possible to use their biosketch and a letter of support in the application and submit the consortium agreement later?

• Answer: Yes, it is permissible to submit the consortium agreement at a later date and to submit the letter of support and biosketch with your current application.

12. Can you please confirm if the Letter of Intent (LOI) is due on Wednesday, November 1, 2023?

• Answer: Yes, the letter of intent is due November 1, 2023. It is not required and is not binding.

13. Can you provide more information about the Data Management Plan template?

• Answer: Please refer to Section IV. Application and Submission Information, Part 5. PHS 398 Research Plan Component on page 27 of the NOFO for information on what should be included in the data management plan. The NCIPC data management plan template can be found here. [PE(1] Other examples of data management plans include the CDC OMB approved template (e.g., NCCDPHP template https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/pdf/nofo/DMP- Template-508.docx) and USGS (http://www.usgs.gov//products/data-and-tools/data-management/data-management-plans).

Section III. Eligibility Information, 5 Responsiveness, from the third criteria regarding PI/Co-PI requirements deleted “substance use, substance use disorders, or overdose” and replaced with violence prevention. Paragraph now reads:

“The SF-424 Biographical Sketch for the PI or Co-Investigator(s) must include documentation of expertise in the area of violence prevention that is reflected in the application's research strategy section. The knowledge, experience, and expertise necessary to conduct this research and achieve proposed objectives must be documented with at least one first-authored, peer-reviewed publication as https://www.cdc.gov/injury/pdfs/erpo/NCIPC-DMP-Template-2026_LG-508.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/pdf/nofo/DMP-Template-508.docx https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/pdf/nofo/DMP-Template-508.docx http://www.usgs.gov/products/data-and-tools/data-management/data-management-plans http://www.usgs.gov/products/data-and-tools/data-management/data-management-plans defined by the NIH National Library of Medicine in the relevant area of substance use, substance use disorders, or overdose, or by serving as a principal investigator on a research grant in violence prevention. Experience requirements may be demonstrated through the combined experiences of a Principal and Co-Principal Investigator (if applicable). The citation of the relevant publication(s) or research experience must be clearly identified (by bold text or highlight) in the appropriate SF 424 Biographical Sketch.