Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Centers (P30)

The following is a limited submission opportunity with only one proposal for the Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Centers (P30) per institution is allowed. If you are interested in this program please email Michelle Wonsey a single PDF by 12pm on July 6, 2017 with the following pre-proposal requirements:

1.      A two-page summary that must include your research/project:

a.      goals
b.      objectives
c.       methods, and
d.      a short statement of competitiveness (i.e., what you think will discriminate your proposal from the competition, including anything you have done to pre-position yourself/your team for this funding opportunity)

2.      A pro forma budget, including any cost-sharing and facilities requirements and how you plan to meet them; use template: https://www.umass.edu/research/form/pro-forma-budget-template
3.      A short-form CV for the PI and each senior staff person
4.      Current and Pending Support of PI’s

 

Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Centers (P30)


https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-AG-18-007.html


Program Description:

The Claude D. Pepper Older American Independence Centers (OAIC) program was established in honor of the late Representative to establish centers of excellence in research and research education to increase scientific knowledge leading to better ways to maintain or restore independence in older persons.

The OAIC awards are designed to develop or strengthen awardee institutions’ programs that focus and sustain progress in a key area of aging research. Applicants should identify an area of focus in which progress could contribute to greater independence for substantial populations of older persons and offer opportunities for education in aging research. This area of focus should be a common theme around which all proposed OAIC activities are organized. NIA's expectation is that an OAIC, in a given area of focus, will:

  • Provide intellectual leadership and innovation;
  • Facilitate and develop novel multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research strategies;
  • Stimulate incorporation of emerging technologies, methods and scientific advances into research designs as appropriate;
  • Provide research education for future leaders in geriatric research;
  • Stimulate translation between basic and clinical research (e.g., research to develop or test interventions or diagnostic tests based on new findings from basic aging research or other basic research, or studies to improve understanding of mechanisms contributing to clinical or functional findings);
  • Promote translation of clinical research findings into practice in relevant healthcare settings (see also "Health Services Research as an Area of Focus" below);
  • Collaborate substantially with other OAICs on multi-center projects such as integrating data systems, supporting multi-center observational studies, and providing infrastructure to support multi-site clinical trials, including pragmatic trials;
  • Interface where possible with other NIA-funded programs and Centers (e.g., Resource Centers for Minority Aging Research (RCMARs), Centers on the Demography and Economics of Aging, Edward R. Roybal Centers for Translation Research in the Behavioral and Social Sciences of Aging, Alzheimer's Disease Centers (ADCs), Nathan Shock Centers);
  • Leverage institutional resources, including other NIH-supported programs and Centers, to achieve the OAIC's aims with efficiency; and
  • Serve as a source of advice and collaboration to other investigators locally and on a large-scale regarding technology, methodology, analysis, or other expertise.

Area of Focus

To achieve the objectives listed above, each OAIC should promote a sustained research program in an area of focus through which the Center will accomplish the innovation, leadership, collaborative, and research education functions described above. It is crucial to the design of an OAIC to identify an important research area to be addressed, to specify the goals to be achieved within the five-year OAIC award period, to provide a plan to reach these goals, and to outline a method to evaluate progress toward these goals during the course of the OAIC award. The selection of core activities (see below) should follow from these considerations.

An OAIC may select an area of research focus from a broad range of topics, including but not limited to:

  • Aging–related issues concerning a specific condition contributing to loss of independence in older persons (e.g., role of aging changes in the etiology of the condition; special issues in the diagnosis, treatment, or prevention of the condition in old age; complications, disability, or symptoms from the condition found principally in older persons).
  • Causes, assessment, prevention, and treatment (including rehabilitation) of a specific type of disability in older persons.
  • Causes, prevention, and treatment of geriatric syndromes (e.g., sarcopenia, falls, incontinence) that are related to multiple pathologies and/or disabilities.
  • Specific aging-related physiologic changes, other risk factors, and/or interventions (e.g., physical activity) that affect risk for multiple conditions or disabilities in old age.
  • Interactions of multiple diseases, disabilities, and interventions (e.g., medications) in older persons, and their relationship to risk of morbidity, progression of disability, and efficacy of prevention or treatment strategies.
  • Factors contributing to amelioration or delay of multiple deleterious aging changes by modulating risk factors or fundamental aging mechanisms.

In general, each research focus described above has the potential for a wide range of developmental and infrastructural activities that are likely to be interdependent and synergistic. Thus, an OAIC strategy of selecting several key activities that address its area of focus may have unique benefits.

As the level of funding for individual OAICs is unlikely to allow such a set of activities for more than one focus area, applicants are strongly encouraged to select an area in which their strengths allow their OAIC to fulfill NIA's goal for the OAIC program and to direct their proposed OAIC activities toward that research area, while also ensuring that opportunities exist for collaboration among other OAICs and other NIA programs and Centers. The total impact of an OAIC's activities on progress in the selected field(s) should be a major criterion in selection of the focus area and will be a major criterion in peer review and program evaluation.

To capitalize on important new research opportunities within their institutions, OAICs may also support a limited amount of activity in their cores on topics other than those in their area of focus (see below). Applicants who anticipate providing such support should propose a system for identifying these opportunities and needs and for selecting core activities to address them.

Cognitive and Behavioral/Social Research as an Area of Focus. Cognitive or behavioral/social research should not be the major focus of an OAIC, as these areas are more appropriate for other NIA programs that also use the Center mechanism. However, where appropriate, OAICs are encouraged to support a multidisciplinary approach that includes research in these areas as they relate to the theme or focus of the OAIC.

Health Services Research as an Area of Focus. Research to determine effects of organizational or operational patterns of health practices or services, or the use of new or different types of healthcare providers, is generally appropriate for an OAIC or a component of an OAIC if it meets the following two criteria, in addition to the criteria above that exclude the major focus on cognitive and behavioral/social research:

1. The research is a) designed to obtain new knowledge about the effects of interventions or healthcare practices that clearly specify what will be done for, or by, the individuals treated by these interventions or practices, or b) designed to obtain new knowledge about the validity or predictive value of diagnostic or assessment techniques that clearly specify what will be measured in individuals. Examples of interventions or diagnostic strategies that may meet this criterion include:

  • New drug or hormonal intervention protocols that may require a new organizational strategy to deliver them
  • Disability prevention strategies based on application of treatment algorithms
  • Structured physical activity programs
  • New diagnostic measures for an age-related condition (e.g., tests for diastolic dysfunction)
  • Determining validity or predictive value of a functional assessment algorithm

2. The research is designed to determine health or risk-factor effects relating to outcomes that are primarily clinical or functional (other than cognitive) in the individuals treated by the intervention or practice. Examples of outcomes include:

  • Disease and risk-factor outcomes, including diet and physical activity
  • Functional outcomes
  • Physiologic outcomes

Research to determine effects of organizational or operational patterns of health practices or services, or the use of new or different types of health care providers, would generally not be appropriate as a principal focus of an OAIC or OAIC component if either of the following two criteria were met:

1. The research is neither a) designed to obtain new knowledge about the effects of interventions that clearly specify what will be done for, or by, the individuals treated by the intervention or practice, nor b) designed to obtain new knowledge about the validity or predictive value of diagnostic or assessment techniques that specify what will be measured in individuals. Examples of diagnostic or intervention research that would generally be considered inappropriate as a principal focus for an OAIC or component of an OAIC include:

  • Testing effects of a geriatric assessment unit or other new health care service, without both a) specification of the assessment protocol, criteria for deciding on appropriate treatment, a protocol for implementing treatment, and an adequate design to evaluate effects of these specific elements, and b) a design adequate to determine the effects of these specific components
  • Testing the effects of adding a new type of health professional (e.g., pharmacist) to a hospital service without both a) specification of the change in specific diagnostic or intervention procedures that would be implemented, and b) a design adequate to determine the effects of these specific changes.

2. The research is not adequately designed to determine health or risk factor effects relating to outcomes that are primarily clinical or functional (other than cognitive) in the individuals treated by the intervention or practice; for example:

  • Research designed to determine effects only on health care providers' behavior (e g., time spent per patient or number of diagnostic tests performed)
  • Research designed to determine effects only on patients' behavior (e.g., adherence to a set of dietary guidelines).

Sponsor Deadline:
September 19, 2017 – Letter of Intent
October 19, 2017 by 5:00pm – Full proposal