NINDS Announces Availability Funds Competitive Revision Applications Grand Challenge Optimal Cortical Control DARPA Revolutionizing Upper-Limb Prosthetics R01 R37) Notice Number: NOT-NS-10-013 Update: following update relating this announcement been issued: April 5, 2010 - Notice NOT-NS-10-015 Corrections NOT-NS-10-013, NINDS Announces Availability Funds Competitive Revision Applications Grand Challenge Optimal Cortical Control DARPA Revolutionizing Upper-Limb Prosthetics R01 R37). Key Dates Release Date: March 12, 2010 Application Due Date: 12, 2010 Earliest Anticipated Start Date: September 30, 2010 Issued National Institute Neurological Disorders Stroke NINDS),
http://www.ninds.nih.gov/) Purpose purpose this notice to encourage requests competitive revisions research projects currently funded NIH R01 R37 grant mechanisms, appropriate support research development a Grand Challenge achieving optimal electrocorticography ECoG) based cortical control the Revolutionizing Upper-limb Prosthetics 2009 developed the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency DARPA). Grand Challenge be achieve reaching grasping objects the DARPA Arms a subjects natural work space, obtaining maximum cortical control can realized the highly anthropomorphic prosthetic arm hand. Background Device-based therapeutic approaches offer opportunities restoring neurological function through mechanical, electronic, neural interfacing technologies, complement cellular molecular strategies under development, their roles reducing burden disease injuries. DARPA Revolutionizing Upper-limb Prosthetics DARPA Arms) been developed response the urgent needs providing clinical care and improving life quality the recently injured war veterans. Launched 2005 funded over 100 million, four-year component the program a 2009 deadline demonstrate modular upper-limb prosthetic where associated hardware software become available open-source, that specifications replace current confusion scattered prosthetic-arm designs a standard platform could incorporate current well the future 21st century technologies. the desired functions be anthropomorphically designed fit inside package has look, weight, strength, dexterity, natural movement, toughness an intact arm. Led DEKA Inc., by Applied Physics Laboratory APL) the Johns Hopkins University, over 30 universities research institutions, more 300 investigators, participated the DARPA project. is multidisciplinary collaboration areas mechatronics, neuroscience, neurology/neurosurgery, electrical engineering; signal processing, battery design, nanotechnology, robotics, cognitive behavioral sciences. of participating labs considered leading groups their respective fields. of goals the DARPA Arm program to allow investigators explore neural sensorimotor integration feedback paradigms could incorporated the control the prosthetic arm upper-limb amputees, by patients paralysis-related disorders, such spinal cord injury SCI) stroke, regain purposeful movements functions. DARPA Arms designed be capable being controlled decoded neural signals. is expected rigorous comprehensive experimental tests optimal neural control animals humans be conducted, once electromechanic components completed. is also recognized investigators have scientific knowledge interests who also the appropriate experimental resources provide test platform identifying optimal neural control the DARPA arm mostly NIH-funded investigators. funding initiative intends capture unique opportunity providing NIH-supported expertise sensorimotor neurophysiology neural interface technology a scientific challenge developing demonstrating optimal cortical control paradigms these highly advanced anthropomorphically designed prosthetic arms. Scope Objectives the Grand Challenge competitive revision up a maximum 2 years duration project period the competitive revision not extend beyond of parent award) be limited currently active NIH projects focus studying cortical sensorimotor control functions awake humans non-human primates using defined motor behavioral paradigms the upper arm, and/or projects involve electrocorticographic ECoG) local field potential LFP) recordings awake humans. parent projects should already the capability generating brain signals cortical areas, be decoded establishing interface neutral control an external device. goal to foster collaborative team efforts NIH-funded cortical neurophysiologists, neurosurgeons have significant experience ECoG LFP data collection awake humans. receive competitive revision funding, proposed revision projects should established IRB approval all invasive procedures humans. collaborative team should the capability recording decoding broadband low high frequency cortical signals, capable interfacing the DARPA Arms optimal ECoG based cortical control. particular interest signals recorded multiple cortical sites in combination multiple modalities. intend seek most robust approach recording signals terms recording scale, duration, signal quality), most robust decoding algorithm, the smoothest, volitionally-controlled kinematic trajectories the full functional degrees freedom the arm hand. additional programmatic interest the potential role brain plasticity plays adaptive control dexterity using visual other sensory) feedback, once neural interfacing established. We expect Grand Challenge not only able identify implement best ECoG-based cortical control the DARPA Arms, will also reverse-translational generating important scientific questions further basic science research this program area. Progress be monitored NIH DARPA program staff through semi-annual reporting site-visiting, will evaluated administratively sufficient progress merit release funds the second year. Funded projects be required present results evaluation NIH DARPA program staff a selected steering committee a dedicated workshop symposium, using video demo kinematic analysis cortical controlled DARPA arm hand movement. resource sharing plan be required element the application. Eligibility notice calls competitive revision applications active NIH Research Grants funded under R01 R37 grant mechanisms. be eligible, parent award which revision application based must active the time revision application submitted. project period the competitive revision not extend beyond of parent award. a no-cost extension needed complete work be proposed the revision, no-cost extension must in place before application submitted. proposed studies must within scope described the Scope Objectives the Grand Challenge section above, i.e. peer-reviewed activities specified within active NIH parent award(s) include recording brain signals human non-human primates performing upper-limb motor tasks, and/or projects involve electrocorticographic ECoG) local field potential LFP) recordings awake humans. all revision applications, Project Director/Principal Investigator PD/PI) must the same the PD/PI the parent award. revision applications multiple PD/PI parent awards, Contact PD/PI must the PD/PI listed the parent application. competitive revision does allow change the Multiple PD/PI team nor conversion a single PD/PI multiple PD/PIs. revision applications must submitted the sponsoring institution the PD/PI Contact PD/PI multi-PD/PI grants) listed the parent grant. Only revision request be submitted per PD/PI an NIH-funded parent project. NIH encourages participation individuals racial ethnic groups underrepresented biomedical behavioral research, individuals disabilities individuals disadvantaged backgrounds. Budget Funding Information NINDS intends commit to 3 million total costs per year FY 2010 FY 2011 fund to 4 competitive revisions response this announcement. Funding competitive revisions existing parent awards be available FY2010 FY 2011. Due the limited, two-year nature these funds, competitive revision applications be requested no than years; therefore scope budget the requested revision must reflect aims goals can accomplished within limited timeframe. Applicants must submit budget using same budget format was used the parent award. applicant request budget up 400,000 per year direct costs associated the proposed new work, addition the funds allowed purchasing DARPA Arms. Applicants should budget 250,000 either DEKA arm
www.dekaresearch.com) the APL arm
www.jhuapl.edu/ourwork/biomed). Device specifications interface details the DARPA Arms be obtained directly contacting DEKA APL, by contacting the NIH Program Director listed below. DARPA currently negotiating prices these arms. lower prices achieved, awards be reduced commensurately. maximum duration each award be limited two years. Facilities Administrative F&A) costs be paid the full, negotiated rate. Applicants should provide detailed budget justification personnel costs, supplies, other expenses. revision award period cannot extend beyond original project end date the parent grant. Any no-cost extension must in place before submission the revision application. Although budget plans the NINDS provide support this program, awards pursuant this solicitation contingent upon availability funds the receipt a sufficient number meritorious applications. Application Review Process mission the NIH to support science pursuit knowledge the biology behavior living systems to apply knowledge extend healthy life reduce burdens illness disability. part this mission, applications submitted the NIH grants cooperative agreements support biomedical behavioral research evaluated scientific technical merit through NIH peer review system. funding considerations, revision applications be assigned the IC through the parent grant funded. Applications are complete be evaluated scientific technical merit appropriate scientific review group(s) convened the Center Scientific Review accordance NIH peer review procedures
http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/peer/) using review criteria stated below. Applicants be notified regarding review outcome. part the scientific peer review, applications will: Undergo selection process which only those applications deemed have highest scientific technical merit, generally top half applications under review, be discussed assigned overall impact/priority score; Receive written critique; Receive second level review the appropriate national advisory council board. Overall Impact. Reviewers provide overall impact/priority score reflect assessment the likelihood the project exert sustained, powerful influence the research field(s) involved, consideration the standard review criteria, additional review criteria applicable the project proposed). review committee consider overall scientific merit the new work proposed, appropriateness the match between parent project the proposed work, the likelihood the project achieve goal the Grand Challenge. reviewing revision application, committee consider scientific merit the new work proposed the appropriateness the proposed expansion the scope the project. the revision application relates a specific line investigation presented the original application was recommended approval the committee, the committee consider whether responses comments the previous scientific review group adequate whether substantial changes clearly evident. Additionally, committee consider feasibility accomplishing specific aims the revision application within requested project period. Scored Review Criteria. standard review criteria research grant applications cooperative agreements be used reviewers evaluating scientific technical merit all applications outlined this Notice: NOT-OD-09-025. Additional Review Criteria. applicable the project proposed, reviewers consider following additional items the determination scientific technical merit, will give separate scores these items: Protections Human Subjects; Inclusion Women, Children, Minorities; Vertebrate Animals; Biohazards. Additional Review Considerations. applicable the project proposed, reviewers address of following items, will give scores these items should consider in providing overall impact/priority score: Budget Period Support; Select Agent Research; Resource Sharing Plans. After peer review the application completed, PD/PI be able access or Summary Statement written critique) via NIH eRA Commons. Selection Process Applications submitted response this funding opportunity compete available funds all recommended applications. following be considered making funding decisions: Scientific technical merit the proposed project determined scientific peer review. Availability funds. Translational impact relevance the proposed project program priorities. Award Notices the application considered funding, NIH request just-in-time" information the applicant. details, applicants refer the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms Conditions NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General. formal notification the form a Notice Award NoA) be provided the applicant organization. NoA signed the grants management officer the authorizing document. Once administrative programmatic issues been resolved, NoA be generated via email notification the awarding component the grantee business official. Terms Award awards be subject the standard NIH terms award. Selection an application award not authorization begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt the NoA at recipient's risk. costs be reimbursed only the extent considered allowable pre-award costs. Section IV.5., Funding Restrictions. resource sharing plan become part the terms conditions the award. Program Official one more the participating NIH Institutes Centers be assigned each funded application will assume responsibility normal stewardship the awards. NIH grant cooperative agreement awards include NIH Grants Policy Statement part the NoA. these terms award, the NIH Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms Conditions NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General Part II: Terms Conditions NIH Grant Awards, Subpart B: Terms Conditions Specific Types Grants, Grantees, Activities. to Apply receipt date revision applications May 12, 2010. Applicants interested applying revision support must submit application through Grants.gov, using Funding Opportunity Announcement FOA) was used the parent grant. Or, this FOA no longer active, the Parent FOA matches program activity code) the award. activity code the prior submission referenced the Federal Identifier the SF 424 RR Cover page) must match activity code the FOA used the revision e.g., R01s will PA-10-067). Notice should mentioned the cover letter. Competitive revisions applications grants using activity code R37 Method Extend Research Time MERIT) Awards) should the Parent R01 FOA PA-10-067). NOTE: Applicants submitting R37 revision response the R01 Parent FOA receive following warning eSubmission: mechanism the prior submission referenced the Federal Identifier the SF 424 RR Cover page) does match mechanism the Funding Opportunity Announcement FOA). Please check Federal Identifier provided your application ensure are including correct prior information the FOA ensure are submitting the correct opportunity. application be processed there be delay referral. Please ignore warning. ALL applications: Follow instructions noted below. Note: Font size restrictions apply designated within applicable SF424 R&R) Application the PHS398 application instructions. current NIH guideline page limitations should followed. Include Cover Letter cite Notice Number NOT-NS-10-013) title NINDS Announces Availability Funds Competitive Revision Applications Grand Challenge Optimal Cortical Control DARPA Revolutionizing Upper-Limb Prosthetics R01 R37)] the first sentence. Provide one-page Introduction describes nature the revision how relates the scope the specific aims, research design, methods the current grant. Item 2.1, Introduction application, the PHS 398 Research Plan component provide information. body the application should contain sufficient information the original grant application allow evaluation the proposed revision relation the expertise approach the original application. Applicants must submit budget using same budget format was used the parent award. Any budgetary changes the remainder the project period the current grant must discussed the Budget Justification. Any significant budgetary changes the remainder the project period the current grant must discussed the Budget Justification. Include following additional information the revision application: a) Specific Aims. Summarize activities were included the parent grant encompass those proposed the revision request. section should include description the revisions specific aims, including research design methods data analysis. Describe relationship the revision request the parent grant the impact the proposed work have the research field(s) involved. b) Research Strategy. research strategy section, limited 12 pages, should discuss the cortical neurophysiology expertise the existing research resource the current parent grant be leveraged synergized the expertise the collaborating neurosurgical team, address scientific technical issues the Grand Challenge. c) Budget. budget format must the same that the parent grant. Budget the revision a justification details items requested, including Facilities Administrative costs a justification all personnel their role this project. budget provided the revision application must match budget provided the parent application. instance, the parent application submitted using Modular budget component, the revision application must also the Modular budget component. d) Biographical Sketch PD/PI all new Senior/Key Personnel those are additions the revision project). will need include updated biographical Sketch the PD/PI new Senior/Key Personnel, using forms, are available MS
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/biosketch.doc) PDF
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/biosketch.pdf). is need repeat information previously provided other Senior/Key Personnel. e) Human Subjects/Vertebrate Animal documentation applicable). Include current Human Subjects/IRB Vertebrate Animals/IACUC approval letter, available. Otherwise, will required the time funding. appropriate IRB IACUC approvals must in place prior a revision award being made. Any differences the involvement use human subjects specimens, use vertebrate animals, between administrative revision activity the parent grant should noted. appropriate, details should provided the protection human subjects inclusion women, children, minorities. Additional guidance Human Subjects Research Vertebrate Animals provided under Part II the PHS 398 instructions
http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html). electronic applications R01, R37): the SF424 R&R) Application Guide available at: ttp://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/424/SF424_RR_Guide_General_Adobe_VerB.doc (MS 3.5 MB])
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/424/SF424_RR_Guide_General_Adobe_V… PDF 4.5 MB]). Inquiries Applicants are encouraged discuss plans responding this Notice phone e-mail NINDS Program Directors listed below. Scientific inquiries also directed the NIH Program Directors oversee parent grant associated the competitive revision request. Dr. Daofen Chen Dr. James Gnadt Program Directors Systems Cognitive Neuroscience National Institute Neurological Disorders Stroke Neuroscience Center 6001 Executive Blvd Rockville, MD 20892 301) 496-9964 Email:
daofen.chen@nih.gov;
gnadtjw@mail.nih.gov