FY 2003 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
FY 2003 Archive
FY 2002 Archive
FY 2001 Archive
FY 2000 Archive
FY 1999 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, 2002 to
December 31, 2002 the NIH salary cap was
$166,700. Effective January 1, 2003 the
salary cap increased to $171,900 and will
result in additional funds being awarded
to only those new (Type 1) grants in FY
2003 that qualify according to NIH guidelines.
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:
Investigators holding First Independent
Research Support and Transition (FIRST)
awards who are ending their initial project
period and recompeting 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.
The NHLBI policy for competing renewal
and MERIT extension grants that will be
awarded in Fiscal Year 2003 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.
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 $1,420,000. Facilities and Administrative
(F&A) Costs associated with subcontracts
are NOT included in the $1,420,000.
Type 2: The direct cost award will not
exceed $1,420,000 or 10 percent more than
the recommended amount shown on the Notice
of Grant Award for the last noncompetitive
year. 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 2003 reflected on the FY
2002 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 2003 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.
Revised: February 2003
|