what is a research training program

Duke University School of Medicine's Clinical Research Training Program (CRTP) provides Duke and National Institutes of Health (NIH) physicians, investigators and other healthcare professionals with the academic training needed to stand out in today's dynamic clinical research environment.

A Pioneering Role in Biomedical Research 

This rigorous academic program offers practicing physicians, investigators and other healthcare professionals training to excel in today's dynamic clinical research environment.

The Clinical Research Training Program promotes leading-edge investigative practices grounded in sound scientific principles.  As one of the oldest programs of it's kind, the program has offered highly relevant courses and mentored research that impact quantitative and methodological knowledge to conceptualize and carry our hypothesis driven multidisciplinary research for over 30 years.

30 Years of Research

Established in 1986 to train Duke researchers and health professionals, CRTP now includes NIH Researchers with over 500 alumni at the forefront of complex issues shaping clinical research today.

Prepare Today. Excel Tomorrow.

Course Descriptions

Course Directors

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Community Eye Health
• v.20(61); 2007 Mar

Research and training programmes

Research is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as “a systematic investigation and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions.”

Research is embedded in the curricula of most postgraduate training programmes; students are expected to complete some form of original work towards a dissertation. This often evokes a range of reactions: “What is the purpose of this exercise? Why do I have to do research when I just want to do a job? Shouldn't research rather be left to experts? I can't do the course; I have no research background!”

In this editorial, I aim to show that research is in fact an integral part of learning, and that it teaches the knowledge, skills, and attitudes required for successful eye health work. I also hope to highlight how higher education institutions can support this process.

Research projects are often described as providing students with “cognitive, emotional, social and practical experiences” 1 which might otherwise be difficult to teach. In order to enable a student to have the best possible learning outcome, therefore, research projects must be clearly structured and students should be supported by the institution and the curriculum.

The learning process: how does it work?

Higher education training involves student-centred or self-directed learning, since adult students have accumulated considerable experience through their work, life, and education. 2 This experience provides the foundation upon which new learning is built.

A female interviewer talking to a mother in rural Bangladesh as part of the MSc project of International Centre for Eye Health student Lutful Husain (page 7). BANGLADESH

Higher education gives students an opportunity to make observations, reflect on their experiences, and analyse ideas they have accumulated over time. These ideas form the basis of abstract concepts or theories that can be tested through active experimentation. This leads to new experiences, and the process starts again.

This cycle of experiential learning, known as Kolb's learning cycle, 3 will continue as long as each new experience is reflected upon (Figure ​ (Figure1). 1 ). The underlying principle is ‘learning by doing’.

Kolb's learning cycle 3

Research projects and the learning process

Research projects require a series of stages, from deciding on a project topic to writing a conclusion, which take a student through the learning cycle depicted in Figure ​ Figure1. 1 . Each stage of the research project supports the process of learning.

The MSc students whose dissertation projects are described in this issue of the Community Eye Health Journal (page 7 onwards) will all have gone through this learning cycle, irrespective of the subject or methodology of their projects.

If a research project is properly supported by both the curriculum and the institution, each stage of the project also results in the student acquiring a wide range of knowledge, skills, and attitudes appropriate for their career development (Table ​ (Table1 1 ).

The learning gains for each research stage

From experience to reflection

The first stage is to find a suitable topic for a research project. Students often worry about this: “I have no idea what to do!”

Past experiences and challenges are the starting point for exploring areas of interest. The topic needs to be personally stimulating and relevant. It should not only enable the student to pass the course, but also be valuable to others. Sharing opinions and views with tutors, experts in the field, and other students contributes to the reflective process, enabling the individual to identify a topic or a problem. Students might analyse critical incidents from their professional experience to identify issues for further investigation.

Good supervision and a well-designed curriculum enable the student to learn through reflection: he or she becomes familiar with the core knowledge of the research topic, learns to interpret new information, and is able to carefully formulate the research question/problem.

The expectation at this point is that each student begins to develop clear views about the topic. The end product of this reflection is a rationale for carrying out the particular research project. Students should be able to clearly state the main aim/purpose of their research, for example: “To determine the visual outcome after cataract surgery at Hospital X” or “To establish the prevalence and main causes of blindness in region Y.”

From reflection to conceptualisation

Learning progresses in an exciting way once the student has grasped why they want to do the project. The reaction at this point is often: “What is the best method to get the answer to my research question?”

Students need to decide on the design of the study. They should also consider what the best methods are for collecting their data, whether qualitative, quantitative, or a combination of both (page 7). Doing this sets the student on the path to conceptualising their views and knowledge.

At this stage, students must think about sample sizes, time frames, and budgets. They must also figure out how to gain entry to the research site and how to get consent from subjects/participants. Lastly, they need to put a research team together and obtain ethical approval for their project.

Good supervision is crucial in helping students to develop a research methodology that is practical, remains within an allocated budget, and can be carried out within an appropriate time frame.

From conceptualisation to experimentation

The experimentation stage of the project is often described as the most interesting. Field work puts students' knowledge and skills into practice. They learn to train a team; to collect, organise, and manage data; and to enter the data into formats ready for analysis with statistical software packages. At this stage, students begin to reap the benefits of the careful and detailed planning that went into the design of their study.

It is important to get consent from research subjects. BANGLADESH

When students implement and experiment with the ideas they have formulated in the field, the clinic, or the laboratory, this gives rise to new experiences. This process forms the basis of ‘learning by doing’ – also known as experimental learning.

From active experimentation to new experience

The process of reflection and conceptualisation continues during the next two stages of the research project: the analysis of the data and the writing up of the dissertation. New data give rise to new views and ideas, which are compared to those previously held. This is a particularly educative process, as students frequently find their notions and preconceptions challenged. Writing up the research and communicating the results is an active process and offers unique learning opportunities. For many students, this is the first time they face the challenge of writing a report describing their research, synthesising their findings, and making recommendations. This is an experience which will serve them well in any leadership role.

Roles of institutions and supervisors

Institutions have a major role to play. They facilitate the success of student research projects and can maximise the learning opportunities for the student.

The core subject knowledge is usually embedded into the curriculum and every effort is made to expose the student to the skills required for research. However, students should also, where possible, have access to transferable skills workshops, including courses on interpersonal and communication skills, which will help to prepare them for their research projects. Institutions should endeavour to provide the right environment, including libraries and computing services.

Institutions have another important role: they must ensure that ethical guidelines are followed. Projects should not be allowed to proceed unless they have ethical approval from all health authorities concerned. Health and safety regulations must also be scrutinised prior to granting permission to carry out a project, for example if students are travelling to a war-torn region or taking blood from patients. Financial issues should be clearly addressed, with detailed budgets and provision for unexpected challenges, such as insurance for loss or breakage of equipment.

Student supervision provides essential support and should follow a clear framework which sets out the educational objectives, deadlines, targets, and assessment criteria. It is good practice to record the different stages in a logbook. This can also help to establish more equitable supervision, so that all students benefit equally from the attention of supervisors.

It can be argued that, in educational settings, giving students the opportunity to ‘learn by doing’ is the most powerful method of teaching. One could perhaps even argue that the experience of ‘learning by doing’ takes precedence over the content of the research project.

Research Training

Academic medical centers play a leading role in training the next generation of scientists. These researchers are trained across the continuum of research disciplines- to ensure future breakthroughs to improve health and transform health care. There are multiple training pathways for pursuing a career in medical research, each of which contribute to building a diverse research workforce. In addition to training the nation’s physicians, academic medical centers train the majority of biomedical scientists in the United States. For more information, check out these related pages:

Resources for students considering a career in medical research

Resources for deans, directors, and administrators of Ph.D., M.D.-Ph.D., and Postdoctoral Programs

Resources for research deans  

Compact Between Biomedical Graduate Students and Their Research Advisors

This document offers a set of broad guidelines designed to initiate discussions at the local and national levels about the student-mentor relationship and to support the development of a positive mentoring relationship between the pre-doctoral student and their research advisor.

Compact Between Postdoctoral Appointees and Their Mentors

The Compact Between Postdoctoral Appointees and Their Mentors is intended to initiate discussions at the local and national levels about the postdoctoral appointee-mentor relationship and the commitments necessary for a high quality postdoctoral training experience.  The Compact was drafted by the AAMC Group on Graduate Research, Education, and Training (GREAT) and its Postdoctorate Committee, and it is modeled on the AAMC Compact Between Resident Physicians and Their Teachers.

Compact Between Resident Physicians and Their Teachers

This compact is a declaration of the fundamental principles of graduate medical education and the major commitments of both residents and faculty to the educational process, to each other and to the patients they serve

• Research & Technology
• Medical Education
• Basic Science

Training Opportunities

There are several routes to training experiences within the intramural community—whether you are seeking to identify the best research fit for your education and background, locate an open position, or plan your career in science and medicine.

Begin your search with the IRP’s three leading educational offices and programs:

• Postdoctoral and visiting fellows
• Graduate student programs, through formal programs, international exchanges, and for individual students wanting an NIH research experience
• Postbaccalaureate fellows
• Summer students, from high school through graduate school
• Graduate Medical Education, offers 20 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) residency and fellow programs, 7 jointly sponsored programs, and 30 other clinical and translational non-standard fellowship programs.
• Medical Research Scholars Program is a research “year-off” training program for medical, dental, veterinary students that advances health by inspiring future careers as clinician-scientists by engaging students in basic, clinical, or translational research investigations, augmented with a didactic and professional development curriculum, and featuring a robust mentorship and advising program.
• Clinical Elective Program offers over 30 unique short term (4-12 week) clinical elective opportunities for highly motivated students who are strongly interested in, or committed to, research-oriented careers in academic. Additionally mentored clinical research rotations are offered for dual-degree students (M.D.-Ph.D., D.O.-Ph.D.) in the fields of biomedical informatics, cancer immunotherapy, genomic medicine, health services research, and inflammation/inflammatory diseases.
• Ph.D. Program : The NIH Oxford-Cambridge Scholars Program is a highly individualized doctoral program for students seeking to pursue a career in biomedical research. Each OxCam Scholar works with at least two different research supervisors — one at the NIH and one at either Oxford or Cambridge — on a project that involves a collaborative undertaking by the two laboratories.
• M.D./Ph.D. Program : Students interested in pursuing a career as a physician-scientist may pair the NIH OxCam Ph.D. Program with a U.S. medical school or Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP) via the NIH M.D./Ph.D. Partnership Training Program. Students admitted to the NIH M.D./Ph.D. Partnership Training Program conduct research in the NIH Intramural Research Program as part of a coordinated plan of dual-degree training with the student’s selected medical school.

View open NIH post-doctoral positions .

Continue Exploring the IRP

This page was last updated on Wednesday, July 26, 2023

• Technical Help
• CE/CME Help
• Billing Help
• Sales Inquiries

The Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI Program) is dedicated to serving the training needs of colleges and universities, healthcare institutions, technology and research organizations, and governmental agencies, as they foster integrity and professional advancement of their learners.

Explore Our Featured Courses

• Professional
• Other Offerings

This role-based course provides the practical know-how to monitor clinical research sites effectively.

Learn to recognize fraud, waste, and abuse.

Foundational overview of clinical research meant to prepare medical residents and fellows to conduct their own research and work on research teams.

Provides information on risks and threats to the global research ecosystem — and the knowledge and tools necessary to protect against these risks.

A systematic approach to preparing for and adjusting to risks associated with wilderness field research.

Examines mentorship in biomedical and behavioral research, which is critical to advancing science.

Browse all of the courses and series available from CITI Program.

Learn strategies for promoting equity, diversity, and inclusivity in clinical research participation.

A role-based course that provides practical know-how to effectively lead or participate on data monitoring committees.

Reviews best practices and challenges for navigating collaborative research partnerships in a global environment.

Learn ways to manage conflicts with your dissertation chair and committee.

Provides research administrators with strategies to build, improve, and retain employees.

Learn how grant stewardship obligations are a part of responsible conduct of research.

An introduction for students to the meaning of academic integrity and plagiarism.

Discusses ways to improve diversity and equity among clinical trial participants.

Explores the importance of ethics for AI companies and its impact on public trust and profitability.

This course provides learners with a review of contemporary bioethics issues.

This course focuses on developing the knowledge and skill base necessary for being a successful healthcare ethics committee member.

This course covers the core norms, principles, regulations, and rules governing the practice of research.

Explores various types of noncompliance and their impact.

Discusses the FDA’s approach to inspecting GMP facilities and the ways that facilities can prepare for inspections.

Discusses steps that investigators and clinical sites can take to understand and respond to an FDA Form 483.

A general overview of FMLA and special considerations for grant-funded research.

Provides learners with practical tips to make ADA, Section 504, and accommodations in the 21st century more accessible and equi...

Explores the use of drones in research and the regulations and requirements researchers and administrators need to know.

Helps develop leadership skills to meet today’s changing, diverse, and dynamic environments.

Discusses the importance of CRA soft skills in building productive relationships with sites and sponsors.

Introduces regulations and their application as they relate to subrecipient monitoring.

Provides learners with an overview on the state of faculty and staff mental health while explaining the role an institution can...

Provides instruction on how to improve your teaching and training skills in a variety of settings.

Provides an overview of conflict, types of conflict, conflict styles, communication styles, and intervention strategies.

N2 is a not-for-profit alliance of Canadian research networks and organizations working to enhance national clinical research capability and capacity.

BIC Study Foundation is a resource for those who want to take CITI Program courses in Korean. They are a certified training provider by the Korean FDA/MAFRA for HRPP and ACU Programs.

A complete research compliance suite that supports IRB, IACUC Conflict of interest, Bio Safety Export Control, and more.

HRP Consulting provides customized services for your research program, including temporary staffing, IRB/IACUC assistance, accreditation support, program evaluations, training/education and more.

CTrials helps grow sponsored research programs by taking on the many administrative challenges inherent in managing clinical trials.

Informed Consent Builder is a cloud-based platform that streamlines the process of managing and generating informed consent forms.

Protocol Builder is an online protocol writing and collaboration platform that also speed up your pre-review turnaround times.

Join Over 2,500 Subscribing Organizations

Highlighted below are just a few select subscribers & collaborators.

Meet A Few Of Our Expert Authors and Presenters

Our courses are built by over 150 highly qualified experts and rigorously peer reviewed to incorporate various perspectives and ensure accuracy, completeness, and overall quality.

Moin Syed, PhD

Moin Syed is an Associate Professor of Psychology at the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities. His research is broadly concerned with identity and personality development among ethnically and culturally-diverse adolescents and emerging adults. He is currently the Editor of Infant and Child Development.

Liza Gordillo, MS

Liza serves as Regulatory Affairs Project Manager at KLS Martin Group. Currently, she authors 510(k) submissions for medical devices undergoing the design and development process. Liza has a BS in Biomedical Engineering at Florida International University and MS in Industrial Engineering at the University of Miami.

Rolando Montoya, EdD

Dr. Rolando Montoya was called to serve as interim president of Miami Dade College (MDC) in August 2019. He retired as provost for operations at MDC in 2017,previously serving the college in various ascending capacities between 1987 and 2017. In addition, he served as a College Trustee following his retirement.

Colin Duckett, PhD

Colin Duckett, PhD, is the Vice Dean for Basic Science at Duke University School of Medicine. He is also a professor and interim chair of the Department of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology. His research expertise is in cancer biology and immunology.

In Our Learners' Words

Gowramma I.P.

Professor of Education

The detailed content and clarity, with examples and case studies, are what I liked best. The ability to switch between reading and A/V modes when required was also useful.

Princess M.

PhD Student

The availability of two different platforms to deliver the information – written and audio-visual – catering to different learning styles was helpful. I also appreciated the self-paced modules that allowed you to return to complete unfinished work.

Visiting Scholar

I like the option to use an interactive audio-visual format, the comprehensiveness of the course and its modules, and the simple explanations of the legal requirements. Completing CITI Program’s course on social and behavioral research was an important and enriching component of my research endeavors and scholarship in the United States.

Clinical Research Nurse

I appreciate being able to learn via a recorded live presentation supported by slides containing key information. I like how the information can be saved and referenced at a later time.

Courses Approved by Top Continuing Education Accreditors

CITI Program courses are approved for CME credits through the Albert Einstein Montefiore Continuing Professional Development Center (CPDC) . Albert Einstein College of Medicine-Montefiore Medical Center (Einstein) is accredited by the Joint Accreditation for Interprofessional Continuing Education to provide continuing education activities for healthcare professionals. Einstein is accredited to offer continuing education credit for the following professions: medicine, nursing, psychology, pharmacy, dentistry, optometry, social work, nutritional science, and athletic training.

CITI Program is also accredited by the International Accreditors for Continuing Education and Training (IACET) and offers IACET CEUs for its learning events that comply with the ANSI/IACET Continuing Education and Training Standard. IACET is recognized internationally as a standard development organization and accrediting body that promotes quality of continuing education and training.

Recent News & Articles

New Webinar – Service Dog 101: Everything You Need to Know

Provides an understanding of the legal foundation, what questions may be asked of the service dog handler, and when and where a service dog handler may be asked to remove their dog.

On Campus Podcast – Title IX 2024 Regulation Updates

Season 2 – Episode 6 – Title IX 2024 Regulation Updates In this episode we delve into the intricacies of Title IX, exploring the impact...

Free Live Webinar – At Risk Survey Research Design: Remaining Diligent

This webinar examines online survey research design considerations and risks from the perspectives of IRB members and researchers.

Privacy Overview

• Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
• Biostatistics
• Environmental Health and Engineering
• Epidemiology
• Health Policy and Management
• Health, Behavior and Society
• International Health
• Mental Health
• Molecular Microbiology and Immunology
• Population, Family and Reproductive Health
• Program Finder
• Admissions Services
• Course Directory
• Academic Calendar
• Hybrid Campus
• Lecture Series
• Convocation
• Strategy and Development
• Implementation and Impact
• Integrity and Oversight
• In the School
• In the Field
• In Baltimore
• Resources for Practitioners
• Articles & News Releases
• In The News
• Statements & Announcements
• At a Glance
• Student Life
• Strategic Priorities
• Inclusion, Diversity, Anti-Racism, and Equity (IDARE)
• What is Public Health?

Mixed Methods Research Training Program for the Health Sciences

• MAS Application Fee Waiver Requirements
• Master of Arts (MA) in Geography and Environmental Engineering
• Master of Arts and Master of Science in Public Health (MA/MSPH)
• Master of Arts in Public Health Biology (MAPHB)
• Master of Bioethics (MBE)
• Mission, Vision, and Values
• Student Experience
• Program Outcomes
• For Hopkins Undergraduate Students
• Master of Health Science (MHS) - Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
• Master of Health Science (MHS) - Department of Epidemiology
• Alumni Update
• MHS Combined with a Certificate Program
• Master of Health Science (MHS) - Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology
• Alumni Highlights
• Post-Baccalaureate Program in Environmental Health for Pre-Medicine Students
• Bachelor's/MHS in Health Economics and Outcomes Research
• MHS HEOR Careers
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Master of Health Science (MHS)
• Concurrent School-Wide Master of Health Science Program in Biostatistics
• Master of Health Science - Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health
• Master of Health Science Online (MHS) - Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health
• Careers in Health Economics
• Core Competencies
• Meet the Director
• What is Health Economics
• MPH Capstone Schedule
• Concentrations
• Online/Part-Time Format
• Requirements
• Tuition and Funding
• Executive Board Faculty
• Master of Science (MS) in Geography and Environmental Engineering
• Independent Professional Project and Final Essay 
• Program Objectives and Outcomes
• Internships
• Master of Science (ScM) - Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
• Master of Science (ScM) - Department of Biostatistics
• Master of Science (ScM) - Department of Epidemiology
• Master of Science (ScM) - Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology
• ScM Faculty Advisers
• Master of Science in Engineering (MSE) in Geography and Environmental Engineering
• Bachelor's/MSPH in Health Policy
• FAQ for MSPH in Health Policy
• Field Placement Experience
• MSPH Capstone
• MSPH Practicum
• Required and Elective Courses
• Student Timeline
• Career Opportunities
• 38-Week Dietetics Practicum
• Completion Requirements
• MSPH/RD Program FAQ
• Program Goals
• Master's Essay Titles
• Application Fee Waiver Requirements
• Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) - Department of Biostatistics
• Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) - Department of Epidemiology
• Program Goals and Expectations
• Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) - Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology
• Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) - Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health
• Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Clinical Investigation
• Track in Environmental Sustainability, Resilience, and Health
• Track in Exposure Sciences and Environmental Epidemiology
• Track in Health Security
• Track in Toxicology, Physiology and Molecular Mechanisms
• PhD in Geography and Environmental Engineering Faculty Advisers
• Recent Graduates and Dissertation Titles
• PhD Funding
• PhD TA Requirement
• Recent Dissertation Titles
• JHU-Tsinghua Doctor of Public Health
• Core Course Requirements
• Concentration in Women’s and Reproductive Health
• Custom Track
• Concentration in Environmental Health
• Concentration in Global Health: Policy and Evaluation
• Concentration in Health Equity and Social Justice
• Concentration in Health Policy and Management
• Concentration in Implementation Science
• Meet Current Students
• Combined Bachelor's / Master's Programs
• Concurrent MHS Option for BSPH Doctoral Students
• Concurrent MSPH Option for JHSPH Doctoral students
• Doctor of Medicine and Doctor of Philosophy (MD/PhD)
• Adolescent Health Certificate Program
• Bioethics Certificate Program
• Climate and Health Certificate Program
• Clinical Trials Certificate Program
• Community- Based Public Health Certificate Program
• Demographic Methods Certificate Program
• Environmental and Occupational Health Certificate Program
• Epidemiology for Public Health Professionals Certificate Program
• Evaluation: International Health Programs Certificate Program
• Food Systems, the Environment and Public Health Certificate Program
• Frequently Asked Questions for Certificate Programs
• Gender and Health Certificate Program
• Gerontology Certificate Program
• Global Digital Health Certificate Program
• Global Health Certificate Program
• Global Health Practice Certificate Program
• Health Communication Certificate Program
• Health Disparities and Health Inequality Certificate Program
• Health Education Certificate Program
• Health Finance and Management Certificate Program
• Health and Human Rights Certificate Program
• Healthcare Epidemiology and Infection Prevention and Control Certificate Program
• Humane Sciences and Toxicology Policy Certificate Program
• Humanitarian Health Certificate Program
• Implementation Science and Research Practice Certificate Program
• Injury and Violence Prevention Certificate Program
• International Healthcare Management and Leadership Certificate Program
• Leadership for Public Health and Healthcare Certificate Program
• Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ) Public Health Certificate Program
• Maternal and Child Health Certificate Program
• Mental Health Policy, Economics and Services Certificate Program
• Non-Degree Students General Admissions Info
• Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Certificate Program
• Population Health Management Certificate Program
• Population and Health Certificate Program
• Product Stewardship for Sustainability Certificate Program
• Public Health Advocacy Certificate Program
• Public Health Economics Certificate Program
• Public Health Informatics Certificate Program
• Public Health Practice Certificate Program
• Declaration of Intent - Public Health Preparedness
• Public Health Training Certificate for American Indian Health Professionals
• Public Mental Health Research Certificate Program
• Quality, Patient Safety and Outcomes Research Certificate Program
• Quantitative Methods in Public Health Certificate Program
• Requirements for Successful Completion of a Certificate Program
• Rigor, Reproducibility, and Responsibility in Scientific Practice Certificate Program
• Risk Sciences and Public Policy Certificate Program
• Spatial Analysis for Public Health Certificate Program
• Training Certificate in Public Health
• Tropical Medicine Certificate Program
• Tuition for Certificate Programs
• Vaccine Science and Policy Certificate Program
• Online Student Experience
• Online Programs for Applied Learning
• Barcelona Information
• Registration, Tuition, and Fees
• Agency Scholarship Application
• General Scholarship Application
• UPF Scholarship Application
• Course Evaluations
• Online Courses
• Registration
• General Institute Tuition Information
• International Students
• Directions to the Bloomberg School
• All Courses
• Important Guidance for ONSITE Students
• D.C. Courses
• Registration and Fees
• Cancellation and Closure Policies
• Application Procedures
• Career Search
• Current Activities
• Current Trainees
• Related Links
• Process for Appointing Postdoctoral Fellows
• Message from the Director
• Program Details
• Admissions FAQ
• Current Residents
• Elective Opportunities for Visiting Trainees
• What is Occupational and Environmental Medicine?
• Admissions Info
• Graduates by Year
• Compensation and Benefits
• How to Apply
• Academic Committee
• Course Details and Registration
• Tuition and Fees
• ONLINE SOCI PROGRAM
• Principal Faculty
• Johns Hopkins RAPID Psychological First Aid
• General Application
• JHHS Application
• Areas of Study
• Important Dates
• Our Faculty
• Welcome Letter
• Descripción los Cursos
• Programa en Epidemiología para Gestores de Salud, Basado en Internet
• Consultants
• Britt Dahlberg, PhD
• Joke Bradt, PhD, MT-BC
• Mark R. Luborsky, PhD
• Marsha Wittink, PhD
• Rebekka Lee, ScD
• Su Yeon Lee-Tauler, PhD
• Theresa Hoeft, PhD
• Vicki L. Plano Clark, PhD
• Program Retreat
• Mixed Methods Applications: Illustrations
• Announcements
• 2023 Call for Applications
• Jennifer I Manuel, PhD, MSW
• Joke Bradt, PhD
• Josiemer Mattei, PhD, MPH
• Justin Sanders, MD, MSc
• Linda Charmaran, PhD
• Nao Hagiwara, PhD
• Nynikka R. A. Palmer, DrPH, MPH
• Olayinka O. Shiyanbola, BPharm, PhD
• Sarah Ronis, MD, MPH
• Susan D. Brown, PhD
• Tara Lagu, MD, MPH
• Theresa Hoft, PhD
• Wynne E. Norton, PhD
• Yvonne Mensa-Wilmot, PhD, MPH
• A. Susana Ramírez, PhD, MPH
• Animesh Sabnis, MD, MSHS
• Autumn Kieber-Emmons, MD, MPH
• Benjamin Han, MD, MPH
• Brooke A. Levandowski, PhD, MPA
• Camille R. Quinn, PhD, AM, LCSW
• Justine Wu, MD, MPH
• Kelly Aschbrenner, PhD
• Kim N. Danforth, ScD, MPH
• Loreto Leiva, PhD
• Marie Brault, PhD
• Mary E. Cooley, PhD, RN, FAAN
• Meganne K. Masko, PhD, MT-BC/L
• PhuongThao D. Le, PhD, MPH
• Rebecca Lobb, ScD, MPH
• Allegra R. Gordon, ScD MPH
• Anita Misra-Hebert, MD MPH FACP
• Arden M. Morris, MD, MPH
• Caroline Silva, PhD
• Danielle Davidov, PhD
• Hans Oh, PhD
• J. Nicholas Dionne-Odom, PhD RN ACHPN
• Jacqueline Mogle, PhD
• Jammie Hopkins, DrPH, MS
• Joe Glass, PhD MSW
• Karen Whiteman, PhD MSW
• Katie Schultz, PhD MSW
• Rose Molina, MD
• Uriyoán Colón-Ramos, ScD MPA
• Andrew Riley, PhD
• Byron J. Powell, PhD, LCSW
• Carrie Nieman MD, MPH
• Charles R. Rogers, PhD, MPH, MS, CHES®
• Emily E. Haroz, PhD
• Jennifer Tsui, Ph.D., M.P.H.
• Jessica Magidson, PhD
• Katherine Sanchez, PhD, LCSW
• Kelly Doran, MD, MHS
• Kiara Alvarez, PhD
• LaPrincess C. Brewer, MD, MPH
• Melissa Radey, PhD, MA, MSSW
• Sophia L. Johnson, PharmD, MPH, PhD
• Supriya Gupta Mohile, MD, MS
• Virginia McKay, PhD
• Andrew Cohen, MD, PhD
• Angela Chen, PhD, PMHNP-BC, RN
• Christopher Salas-Wright, PhD, MSW
• Eliza Park MD, MS
• Jaime M. Hughes, PhD, MPH, MSW
• Johanne Eliacin, PhD, HSPP
• Lingrui Liu ScD MS
• Meaghan Kennedy, MD
• Nicole Stadnick, PhD, MPH
• Paula Aristizabal, MD
• Radhika Sundararajan, MD
• Sara Mamo, AuD, PhD
• Tullika Garg, MD MPH FACS
• Allison Magnuson, DO
• Ariel Williamson PhD, DBSM
• Benita Bamgbade, PharmD, PhD
• Christopher Woodrell MD
• Hung-Jui (Ray) Tan, MD, MSHPM
• Jasmine Abrams, PhD
• Jose Alejandro Rauh-Hain, MD
• Karen Flórez, DrPH, MPH
• Lavanya Vasudevan, PhD, MPH, CPH
• Maria Garcia, MD, MPH
• Robert Brady, PhD
• Saria Hassan, MD
• Scherezade Mama, DrPH
• Yuan Lu, ScD
• 2021 Scholars
• Sign Up for Our Email List
• Workforce Training
• Cells-to-Society Courses
• Course/Section Numbers Explained
• Pathway Program with Goucher College
• The George G. Graham Lecture

MMRTP Retreat

For this 2023 Scholar Cohort, the MMRTP Retreat will be held virtually from June 12-15, 2023. 

Applications are closed! We are no longer accepting applications for 2023.

The deadline for submission was Friday January 13, 2023 at 5pm Eastern Time. The MMRTP Retreat will be held virtually from June 12-15, 2023. 

What is the MMRTP?

The Mixed Methods Research Training Program for the Health Sciences is funded by the National Institutes of Health through the Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research (OBSSR), and is the only program of its kind in the United States. We have reported about the program in three peer-reviewed publications.

The program fulfills a national need for training in mixed methods and is a natural next step following the publication of the OBSSR "Best Practices for Mixed Methods Research in the Health Sciences." Selected scholars have access to webinars, resources, come to an in-person retreat to discuss their research project, and are matched with mixed methods expert consultants. Our program has reported results in 3 peer-reviewed publications.

Mixed methods research is defined as the collection, analysis, and integration of both quantitative (e.g., RCT outcome) data and qualitative (e.g., observations, interviews) data to provide a more comprehensive understanding of a research problem than might be obtained through quantitative or qualitative research alone. Typical applications of mixed methods in the health sciences involve adding qualitative interviews to follow up on the outcomes of intervention trials, gathering both quantitative and qualitative data to assess patient reactions to a program implemented in a community health setting, or using qualitative data to explain the mechanism of a study correlating behavioral and social factors to specific health outcomes.

An increase in proposals submitted to NIH using mixed methods reflects the growing awareness of the importance of this approach in addressing population and behavioral health.

More MMRTP Information

Please explore the below page to learn more about our program.

Follow the MMRTP

• National Institute of General Medical Sciences

• Biophysics, Biomedical Technology, and Computational Biosciences
• Genetics and Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology
• Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry
• Research Capacity Building
• Training, Workforce Development, and Diversity
• Contacts by Research Area
• Funding Opportunities and Notices
• Post Award Information
• Submitting an Application
• NIH RePORTER
• Dashboard of TWD Funded Programs
• High School and Undergraduate
• Postbaccalaureate and Graduate Students
• Postdoctoral, Early Career, and Faculty
• Workforce Development
• Contact Information
• Division Structure and Programs
• Enhancing Diversity in Training Programs
• Evaluation Resources
• Laboratory Safety and Guidelines

Training Resources

• Institutional Development Award (IDeA)
• Native American Research Centers for Health (NARCH)
• Science Education Partnership Awards (SEPA)
• Support for Research Excellence (SuRE)
• DRCB Staff Contacts
• Current NIGMS Funding Opportunities
• Parent Announcements for Investigator-Initiated Applications
• Research Project Grants (NIH Parent R01)
• Research With Activities Related to Diversity (ReWARD)
• Maximizing Investigators' Research Awards (MIRA)
• Instrumentation Grant Program for Resource-Limited Institutions (RLI-S10)
• Undergraduate-Focused Institutions
• Small Business Research
• Multidisciplinary Teams/Collaborative Research
• Technology Development
• Research Resources
• Clinical Studies and Trials
• Conferences and Scientific Meetings
• Administrative Supplements
• All Funding Opportunities
• Which Research Grant Is Right for Me?
• How to Apply
• Grant Application and Review Process
• NIGMS Funding Policies
• Post-Award Information
• Talking to NIH Staff About Your Application and Grant
• Considerations for Multiple Principal Investigator (MPI) Applications
• Attribution of NIH/NIGMS Support
• Message to NIGMS Investigators
• Research Using Human Subjects or Specimens
• Data Management and Sharing Plan Expectations for NIGMS Grantees
• STEM Teaching Resources
• Coloring Pages
• Educator's Corner
• Image & Video Gallery
• NIGMS-Supported Resources
• Protein Alphabet
• Biomedical Beat Blog
• Featured Topics
• Past Campaigns
• Past Releases and Announcements
• Media Coverage
• Feedback Loop Blog
• NIGMS Events
• Webinars for the NIGMS Training Community
• Face to Face with Program Directors
• Grant Writing Webinar Series for Institutions Building Research and Research Training Capacity
• Image and Video Gallery
• Director's Corner
• Organization and Staff
• Staff Directory
• Budget, Financial Management, and Congressional Material
• Strategic Plans
• Data Integration, Modeling, and Analytics
• Advisory Council
• Communications and Public Liaison Branch
• Job Vacancies
• Visitor Information

Highlight Header ​Latest News/Events​

​​​ Trainee Feedback Form for NIGMS Programs ​

Related Information

NIH Website on Rigor and Reproducibility

Undergraduate Research Training Initiative for Student Enhancement (U-RISE) (T34)

Program goal and structure.

The goal of the Undergraduate Research Training Initiative for Student Enhancement (U-RISE) program is to promote broad participation in the biomedical research workforce by strengthening research training environments and expanding the pool of well-trained students who complete their baccalaureate degree, and transition into and complete biomedical, research-focused higher degree programs (such as Ph.D. or M.D./Ph.D.). Specifically, this funding announcement provides support to eligible, domestic organizations to develop and implement effective, evidence-informed approaches to biomedical undergraduate training and mentoring to support the development of a biomedical research workforce that will benefit from the full range of perspectives, experiences and backgrounds needed to advance discovery. NIGMS expects organizations to engage in outreach and recruitment activities to encourage individuals from underrepresented groups to participate in the program (for examples of groups that are underrepresented, see the Notice of NIH's Interest in Diversity ).

Training grants offset the cost of stipends, tuition and fees, and training related expenses, including health insurance, for the appointed trainees in accordance with the approved NIH support levels . Training grants are usually awarded for five years and are renewable. Full details are found in the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO)  PAR-24-137 .

Organizational Eligibility

U-RISE provides support to eligible, domestic organizations to develop and implement effective, evidence-informed approaches to biomedical research training and mentoring that will keep pace with the rapid evolution of the research enterprise. This program is limited to applications from training programs at baccalaureate degree-granting research-active organizations (i.e., those with an average of NIH Research Project Grant (RPG) funding less than $7.5 million total costs over the last 3 fiscal years ). RPG data are available through NIH RePORTER ( see additional guidance here [PDF] ). Only one U-RISE application per organization is allowed.

Trainee Eligibility and Participation

The applicant organization will select the trainees to be supported by the research training program. It is the responsibility of the organization to establish the qualifications, consistent with applicable law, of the trainees before they are supported by the program.

The individual to be trained must be a citizen or a noncitizen national of the United States or have been lawfully admitted for permanent residence at the time of appointment. Additional details on citizenship, training period, and aggregate duration of support are available in the NIH Grants Policy Statement . Trainees should be research-oriented individuals enrolled in a major leading to a baccalaureate degree in a STEM discipline that will prepare the trainee for a biomedical, research-focused higher degree program (e.g., Ph.D. or M.D./Ph.D.).

All trainees are required to pursue their research training full time as specified by the sponsoring organization in accordance with its own policies. Trainees are typically provided full-time support for two to three years of undergraduate studies. Use of training grant support in the final three years of undergraduate research training is strongly encouraged to allow for the participation in research, training, mentoring, professional development, and cohort-building activities that will prepare the trainees to successfully transition into a biomedical, research-focused higher degree program.

Information for Applicant Organizations

Applicants are strongly encouraged to read the NOFO (including Related Notices in the Overview Section), Answers to Frequently Asked Questions , and consult NIGMS staff to discuss eligibility and application requirements prior to submission. When submitting an application, it's important to follow all instructions and avoid issues that lead to noncompliance and withdrawal prior to review .  NIGMS does not require applications requesting $500,000 or more in direct costs for any year to contact staff to obtain agreement that the IC will accept the application.

Potential applicants for U-RISE should contact Dr. Marie Harton , Dr. Joyce Stamm or Dr. Jeremy McIntyre .

The Undergraduate Research Training Initiative for Student Enhancement Program (T34) is part of the NIGMS undergraduate program umbrella cited in 42 CFR 66.102.

Connect With Us: Instagram Linkedin Subscriptions YouTube

• Your Privacy
• Accessibility
• Disclaimers
• HHS Vulnerability Disclosure
• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
• National Institutes of Health: NIH...Turning Discovery Into Health®
• 45 Center Drive MSC 6200
• Bethesda, MD 20892-6200
• 301-496-7301

Just a moment please...

Create a profile to start an application or save information to your dashboard.

• Family Name
• Remember me

By clicking on Sign up you agree to the Terms of Use

Jump back into your application or view saved information.

• Email Address
• Recover your password
• Email or Student ID
• Help Forgot password?

Want to call us?

Call  131 892  or for International callers +61 8 6488 2477

Can't log in?

You may need to activate or reset your student account

Research Training Program

Find out more about Research Training Program (RTP) Fees Offset Scholarships and whether you are eligible.

The Research Training Program (RTP) is a dedicated pool of funding provided by the Australian Government under the Higher Education Support Act to support domestic and international students undertaking research doctorate and research master's degrees.

The RTP Scholarship includes Tuition Fees Offsets and living allowances. RTP Tuition Fees Offsets are automatically provided to all domestic HDR students, without the need for a competitive application process, and to selected international HDR students, on the basis of a competitive application process. RTP living allowances, or stipends, are provided to a limited number of selected domestic and international students, via a competitive process.

View the  UWA Policy on Australian Government RTP Scholarships .

• Australian Government Domestic RTP Fees Offset Scholarship Conditions
• Australian Government International RTP Fees Offset Scholarship Conditions
• Australian Government RTP Stipend Conditions

What is a domestic student?

For the purpose of the Research Training Program, a domestic student is an Australian citizen or Permanent Resident or a New Zealand citizen who is enrolled in a higher degree by research course. 

What is the difference between the RTP Fees Offset Scholarship and the RTS?

The Research Training Scheme (RTS) was introduced on 1 September 2000. The RTS provided block grants to eligible higher education institutions to support research training for students undertaking doctorates and master’s by research. It applied for up to four years full-time equivalent for a doctorate by research and two years full-time equivalent study for a master's by research.

On 1 January 2017 the Research Training Program (RTP) replaced the RTS, the Australian Postgraduate Awards (APA) and International Postgraduate Research Scholarships (IPRS).

The RTP provides Fees Offset Scholarships to domestic students undertaking doctorates and master’s by research. Students approved for Fees Offset Scholarships are normally entitled to up to four years full-time equivalent for a doctorate by research and two years full-time equivalent study for a master's by research.

This entitlement is subject to the student making satisfactory progress and may vary depending on individual circumstances.

The RTP also provides a limited number of Fees Offset Scholarships for international students who are selected via a competitive process.

In addition, the RTP provides a limited number of living allowance scholarships for domestic and international students who are selected via a competitive process.

What is the value of the RTP Fees Offset Scholarship?

The annual value of the RTP Fees Offset Scholarship at UWA is approximately $33,500, and is subject to change in future years.

Do domestic students have to pay a fee for higher degree by research courses?

Not at UWA. At this stage the University has agreed that no fees will be charged to any domestic student admitted to UWA for a higher degree by research.

However, the Government allows universities to charge fees to students who exhaust their funding entitlement and continue their enrolment. The fee to be imposed will be at the discretion of the institution. Institutions may also provide research training on a fee-paying basis to students not granted an RTP place. The fee to be imposed will also be at the discretion of the institution.

This information may be subject to change without notice. Changes may either be to the Department of Education policy or to the University's policy.

Future Students

• Quick Links
• search-courses Search courses
• Courses and careers
• Accommodation
• UWA Current Students
• Research institutes and centres
• Business and industry
• International engagement
• Giving to UWA
• What's on
• 35 Stirling Highway Perth WA 6009 Australia
• (+61 8) 6488 6000
• Campus tour
• Emergency (+61 8) 6488 2222

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Best Practices for Integrating Health Equity Training Certificate Program

The NIA-funded IMPACT Collaboratory recently launched the Best Practices for Integrating Health Equity certificate program. The new program provides online training for learners interested in designing and conducting embedded pragmatic clinical trials for people living with dementia and care partners.

Disclaimer: The inclusion of a resource in ADORE does not represent an endorsement by NIA or the broader National Institutes of Health and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

nia.nih.gov

An official website of the National Institutes of Health

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

JavaScript appears to be disabled on this computer. Please click here to see any active alerts .

Research Training Program for College and University Students

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development National Risk Management Research Laboratory

CLOSED - FOR REFERENCES PURPOSES ONLY

This is the initial announcement of this funding opportunity.

Funding Opportunity Number: EPA-G2016-ORD-C1

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 66.511 - Office of Research and Development Consolidated Research/Training/Fellowships

Solicitation Opening Date: July 1, 2016 Solicitation Closing Date: August 16, 2016, 11:59:59 pm Eastern Time

Technical Contact: Suzanne Jackson ([email protected]); phone: 513-569-7310 Eligibility Contact: Ron Josephson ([email protected]); phone: 202-564-7823 Electronic Submissions: Debra M. Jones ([email protected]); phone: 202-564-7839

Access Standard EPA Forms ( How to Apply and Required Forms )

SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

Synopsis of Program:

The mission of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to protect human health and the environment. The EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD) conducts timely, mission-relevant, solution-oriented research based on the principles of integrity, sustainability, and responsiveness to the needs of the Nation. ORD’s National Risk Management Research Laboratory’s (NRMRL’s) research portfolio spans the five goals outlined in EPA’s Strategic Plan, and directly supports efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve air quality, manage chemical risks, and protect America's water.

EPA-ORD seeks applications from eligible entities to enter into cooperative agreements with EPA that will provide training opportunities for undergraduate and graduate students on-site at EPA-ORD research facilities located in Cincinnati, OH.  It is envisioned that the training program will increase both the effectiveness and number of future environmental scientists. The training received under the mentorship of EPA scientists will complement the trainees’ academic coursework. The recipient will be responsible for ensuring that the training projects are supportive of the trainees’ academic training.  Some examples of the fields of study for desirable trainees include, but are not limited to, those majoring in chemistry, engineering, biology, computer science, physical science, life science, ecology, and urban planning.

Award Information: Anticipated Type of Award: Cooperative Agreement   Estimated Number of Awards: 2 Anticipated Funding Amount: Approximately $2.5 million total for all awards Potential Funding per Award: Up to a total of $1.25 million, including direct and indirect costs, with a maximum duration of 3 years.  Cost-sharing is not required.  Proposals with budgets exceeding the total award limits will not be considered.

Eligibility Information: This solicitation is available to each State, territory and possession, and Tribal nation of the U.S., including the District of Columbia, public and private universities and colleges, hospitals, laboratories, State and local government departments, other public or private nonprofit institutions, and foreign entities. Profit-making firms are not eligible to receive assistance agreements from the EPA under this program. See full announcement for more details.

Application Materials: To apply under this solicitation, use the application package available at Grants.gov (for further submission information see Section IV.F. “Submission Instructions and other Submission Requirements”).  Note: With the exception of the current and pending support form (available at How to Apply and Required Forms ), all necessary forms are included in the electronic application package. Make sure to include the current and pending support form in your Grants.gov submission.

If your organization is not currently registered with Grants.gov, you need to allow approximately one month to complete the registration process. Please note that the registration process also requires that your organization have a unique entity identifier (formerly ‘DUNS number’) and a current registration with the System for Award Management (SAM) and the process of obtaining both could take a month or more.  Applicants must ensure that all registration requirements are met in order to apply for this opportunity through Grants.gov and should ensure that all such requirements have been met well in advance of the submission deadline.  This registration, and electronic submission of your application, must be performed by an authorized representative of your organization.

If you do not have the technical capability to utilize the Grants.gov application submission process for this solicitation, see Section IV.A below for additional guidance and instructions.

Agency Contacts: Technical Contact: Suzanne Jackson ([email protected]); phone: 513-569-7310 Eligibility Contact: Ron Josephson ([email protected]); phone: 202-564-7823 Electronic Submissions: Debra M. Jones ([email protected]); phone: 202-564-7839

I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

A. Introduction

EPA’s ORD seeks to support a Research Training Program for college and university students. The objective of this Request for Applications (RFA) is to support the training of undergraduate and graduate students in research.  The Research Training Program will substantially benefit future environmental scientists and technicians. The goal of the Research Training Program is to increase both the effectiveness and number of future environmental scientists and technicians by allowing trainees to collaborate with senior EPA-ORD scientists while working in a fully operational federal research laboratory. The overall goal is to train the next generation of environmental scientists and engineers to further the Agency’s mission to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve air quality, manage chemical risks, and protect America's water. Research training will be conducted at EPA’s facilities in Cincinnati, Ohio.  Some examples of the field of study for desirable trainees include (but are not limited to) those majoring in chemistry, engineering, biology, computer science, physical science, life science, ecology, and urban planning. 

EPA recognizes that it is important to engage all available minds to address the environmental challenges the nation faces. At the same time, EPA seeks to expand the environmental conversation by including members of communities which may have not previously participated in such dialogues to participate in EPA programs. For this reason, EPA strongly encourages all eligible applicants identified in Section III, including minority serving institutions (MSIs), to apply under this opportunity.

For purposes of this solicitation, the following are considered MSIs:

• Historically Black Colleges and Universities, as defined by the Higher Education Act (20 U.S.C. § 1061). A list of these schools can be found at White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities ;
• Tribal Colleges and Universities, as defined by the Higher Education Act (20  U.S.C. § 1059(c)). A list of these schools can be found at American Indian Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities ;
• Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs), as defined by the Higher Education Act (20 U.S.C. § 1101a(a)(5). There is no list of HSIs. HSIs are institutions of higher education that, at the time of application submittal, have an enrollment of undergraduate full-time equivalent students that is at least 25% Hispanic students at the end of the award year immediately preceding the date of application for this grant; and
• Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions; (AANAPISIs), as defined by the Higher Education Act (20 U.S.C. § 1059g(a)(2)). There is no list of AANAPISIs. AANAPISIs are institutions of higher education that, at the time of application submittal, have an enrollment of undergraduate students that is not less than 10 % students who are Asian American or Native American Pacific Islander.

B. Background EPA-ORD’s National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL), located in Cincinnati, OH, is the administering laboratory for the Research Training Program for College and University Students .  As the lead collaborating organization, and EPA’s premiere laboratory for risk management research, NRMRL focuses on environmental problem-solving. Recognized as a national leader in scientific and engineering expertise and capability, NRMRL’s research portfolio spans the five goals outlined in EPA’s Strategic Plan, and directly supports efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve air quality, manage chemical risks, and protect America's water.

The specific Strategic Goal(s) and Objective(s) from the EPA’s Strategic Plan that relate to this solicitation are:

Goal 1: Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air Quality Objective 1.1: Address Climate Change Objective 1.2: Improve Air Quality

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters Objective 2.1: Protect Human Health Objective 2.2: Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development Objective 3.1: Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities

Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution Objective 4.1: Ensure Chemical Safety

The EPA’s FY 2014-18 Strategic Plan can be found at: EPA Strategic Plan

The Research Training Program provides opportunities for undergraduate and graduate students to be mentored by EPA scientists at ORD’s organizations in Cincinnati - National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL), National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL), and National Homeland Security Research Center (NHSRC).  The ultimate goal is to produce environmental scientists and technicians who not only have relevant classroom experience, but who also have research laboratory experience.  Additional background information on collaborating EPA-ORD-Cincinnati organizations providing training experiences under this RFA can be found at the following sites: NRMRL: About the National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) NERL: About the National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL) NHSRC: Homeland Security Research

The purpose of this announcement is to request applications to competitively select technically and administratively qualified recipients to develop and administer a year-round research training program.  The Research Training Program will supplement the academic training of the trainees by enabling them to complete mentored projects with EPA scientists in ORD’s world-class federal research laboratories located in Cincinnati, Ohio.  The training can be conducted at any time during the calendar year and may be structured to occur in conjunction with the trainees’ academic studies. Training must be conducted at ORD’s Cincinnati facilities, and the applicant must describe its approach for managing any logistics that are necessary to meet this objective.  The Research Training Program must include: (a) undergraduate students who will gain research experience by working either as summer interns, or throughout academic quarters/semesters with EPA-ORD scientists (mentors) on a part-time or full-time schedule, and (b) graduate students, enrolled in Masters or Ph.D. programs, who will receive training in EPA research and will undertake more substantial research projects in collaboration with EPA and university scientists on a part-time or full-time schedule. Applications that do not propose the training and mentoring of both undergraduate and graduate students will not be considered. In order for the training program to be effective and valuable, regular interaction with EPA mentors at EPA-ORD’s Cincinnati facilities is expected over the term of their appointment. Applications that do not propose trainee participation at EPA-ORD’s Cincinnati facilities will not be considered. Research themes for training opportunities will be identified by EPA-ORD-Cincinnati in collaboration with the recipient.  These themes will primarily reflect research priorities and funding availability at ORD-Cincinnati organizations and include, but are not limited to, research in pollution prevention and green chemistry; research of biological, physical and chemical remediation, ecosystem research; and environmental research of watersheds, drinking water and wastewater.  Projects that are consistent with EPA-ORD-Cincinnati’s research themes and suitable for training students will be developed by the recipient.  Some examples of the desired areas of study for trainees include, but are not limited to, chemistry, engineering, biology, computer science, physical science, life science, ecology, and urban planning.  The objective of the training program is not to provide products or services for EPA’s direct use or augment its workforce. EPA will not participate in the trainee selection process or otherwise assume any supervisory responsibilities regarding the trainees selected by the recipient.

It is envisioned that the training program will increase both the effectiveness and number of future environmental scientists. The training received under the mentorship of EPA scientists will complement the trainees’ academic coursework.  The recipient will be responsible for ensuring that the training projects are supportive of the trainees’ academic training.  Training in professional scientific ethics and quality assurance will typically be provided both by the university and EPA programs. The cooperative training experience would include: problem and hypothesis formulation, experimental design, experiments conducted with EPA-ORD-Cincinnati scientists, data analysis, quality assurance, reporting, presenting results and manuscript development and publication.  

C. Authority and Regulations

The authority for this RFA and resulting awards is contained in the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7403, Section 103(b)(3), the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300j-1, Section 1442(c)(3)(A), the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1254, Section 104(b)(3), and the Solid Waste Disposal Act, 42 U.S.C. 6981, Section 8001.

For research with an international aspect, the above statutes are supplemented, as appropriate, by the National Environmental Policy Act, Section 102(2)(F).

Note that a project’s focus is to consist of activities within the statutory terms of EPA’s financial assistance authorities; specifically, the statute(s) listed above.  Generally, a project must address the causes, effects, extent, prevention, reduction, and elimination of air pollution, water pollution, solid/hazardous waste pollution, toxic substances control, or pesticide control depending on which statute(s) is listed above.  Further note applications dealing with any aspect of or related to hydraulic fracking will not be funded by EPA through this program.

Additional applicable regulations include: 2 CFR Part 200, 2 CFR Part 1500, and 40 CFR Part 45 (Training Assistance).

D. Program Components-Specific Areas of Interest & Expected Outputs and Outcomes Note to applicant:  The term “output” means an environmental activity, effort, and/or associated work products related to an environmental goal or objective, that will be produced or provided over a period of time or by a specified date.  The term “outcome” means the result, effect or consequence that will occur from carrying out an environmental program or activity that is related to an environmental or programmatic goal or objective.

Program Components The applicant’s proposed Research Training Program should focus on and address the following components:

• The educational and technical merit of the training program should support EPA’s goal of training the next generation of environmental scientists and engineers. The program should provide for a partnership between a successful institution and EPA-ORD-Cincinnati to train a new generation of students who will obtain degrees in the environmental sciences and pursue careers in environmentally-related fields.
• The applicant is expected to describe the process and procedures for matching the trainees identified for the training program with the available training opportunities related to EPA-ORD-Cincinnati’s research themes. EPA-ORD-Cincinnati will designate mentors through the EPA Project Officer. After award, the EPA-ORD-Cincinnati Mentors will provide research themes for potential projects to be advertised to ensure a fit between the trainees’ interests and qualifications and the training and research opportunities available at the EPA-ORD-Cincinnati laboratory.  Research themes include, but are not limited to, research in pollution prevention and green chemistry; research of biological, physical and chemical remediation, ecosystem research; and environmental research of watersheds, drinking water and wastewater. 
• The applicant should propose how it will provide and manage financial support to trainees. Training must be conducted at ORD’s Cincinnati facilities on a regular basis and the applicant must describe its approach for managing any logistics that are necessary to meet this objective. It is expected that undergraduate trainees will participate by working either as summer interns, or throughout academic quarters/semesters with EPA-ORD scientists (mentors) on a part-time or full-time schedule, and graduate trainees will undertake more substantial research projects in collaboration with EPA and university scientists on a part-time or full-time schedule. The applicant should explain how it will provide scientific oversight for the selected trainees’ development of personal training plans which outline their anticipated learning objectives and the anticipated benefits to their career.  Additionally, the applicant should propose how it will oversee the development of the trainees’ research projects.
• The applicant should propose how it will provide guidance and direction to trainees to ensure they are following the health and safety and quality assurance requirements as described by EPA-ORD Mentors while working at the laboratory; accomplishing the required coursework for their chosen degree without undue interference from their research responsibilities; and, receiving the necessary resources to accomplish the proposed research.
• The program should be designed to recruit trainees from across the country and should include a discussion of the rationale and process for selecting trainees, including trainees that have an economic disadvantage or that lack exposure to environmental science/environmental information due to underdeveloped environmental science infrastructure at their educational institutions. This process may include partnerships with other institutions.
• The applicant should describe how the program will advertise, in as wide a manner as practicable, the traineeships on a competitive basis, and receive, manage, and objectively review applications from students for traineeships. The applicant should describe the selection criteria to be used in the evaluation of potential trainees. Examples of selection criteria are: qualifications, career interests, experience, and academic record.
• The applicant should identify an individual who will be designated to serve as the Principal Investigator/Project Manager. This individual should have a scientific background capable of managing a research training program along with administrative experience.

Overall, the recipient, through the activities of the Principal Investigator and/or identified personnel, will be expected to be responsible for:

• Providing a single point of contact for the EPA Project Officer for all administrative and technical requirements of the cooperative agreement to ensure compliance with the agreement’s terms and conditions;
• Competitively advertising training opportunities;
• Managing the evaluation and selection process for the trainees and providing the names and areas of study for the selected trainees in order for the EPA Project Officer to assign a mentor; 
• Providing scientific oversight for training plans;
• Developing the research projects (with input from the EPA-ORD Mentor) and ensuring trainees achieve anticipated benefits;
• Providing comments to the EPA Project Officer regarding progress of research, problems encountered, and solutions taken;
• Providing guidance and instruction, as necessary, ensuring the trainees follow acceptable scientific methods;
• Providing progress reports to the EPA-ORD Project Officer;
• Ensuring traineeship results are incorporated in a final report that summarizes the trainees’ project objectives, approaches, outcomes, and learning experiences; 
• Providing guidance and assistance in the preparation of scientific publications.
• Managing all supervisory functions, including, managing time and attendance and record keeping.

Outputs and Outcomes

Outputs from the Research Training Program funded under this RFA are expected to include, but are not limited to:

• The training of up to 10-20+ trainees per year;
• Reports that summarize the trainees’ projects, objectives, approaches, learning experiences and budget allocations;
• Scientific and technical publications in the peer-reviewed literature;
• Attendance and presentations of data at national and international scientific meetings;
• Data and information essential to conducting engineering studies.

Examples of expected outcomes include, but are not limited to:

• Increase in the number of environmental scientists and technicians that have the training and experience to immediately enter the workforce upon graduation;
• Increase in the number of environmental scientists who can productively contribute to the understanding of the science needed to manage environmental risks;
• Increase in the overall knowledge and experience of the trainees being mentored and trained.

E. Special Requirements

Agency policy and ethical considerations prevent EPA technical staff and managers from providing applicants with information that may create an unfair competitive advantage.  Consequently, EPA employees will not review, comment, advise, and/or provide technical assistance to applicants preparing applications in response to EPA RFAs.  EPA employees cannot endorse any particular application.

Groups of two or more eligible applicants may choose to form a consortium and submit a single application for this assistance agreement.  The application must identify which organization will be the recipient of the assistance agreement and which organizations(s) will be subawardees of the recipient.

II. AWARD INFORMATION

It is anticipated that a total of approximately $2.5 million will be awarded under this announcement, depending on the availability of funds, quality of applications received, and other applicable considerations.  The EPA anticipates funding approximately 2 awards under this RFA.  Requests for amounts in excess of a total of $1.25 million, including direct and indirect costs, will not be considered.  The total project period requested in an application submitted for this RFA may not exceed 3years. 

The EPA reserves the right to reject all applications and make no awards, or make fewer awards than anticipated, under this RFA.  The EPA reserves the right to make additional awards under this announcement, consistent with Agency policy, if additional funding becomes available after the original selections are made.  Any additional selections for awards will be made no later than six months after the original selection decisions.

In appropriate circumstances, EPA reserves the right to partially fund proposals/applications by funding discrete portions or phases of proposed projects. If EPA decides to partially fund a proposal/application, it will do so in a manner that does not prejudice any applicants or affect the basis upon which the proposal/application, or portion thereof, was evaluated and selected for award, and therefore maintains the integrity of the competition and selection process.

Based on consideration of the nature of the proposed project relative to the EPA’s intramural research program and available resources, the EPA intends to award only cooperative agreements under this announcement.  Although EPA will negotiate precise terms and conditions relating to substantial involvement as part of the award process, EPA anticipates substantial involvement as follows:

• The EPA-ORD Mentor will provide assistance with the development of the research projects and be responsible for ensuring that research activities performed by the trainees at EPA facilities fulfill the requirements of the research projects and are a beneficial learning experience for the trainees;
• EPA staff will train the trainees in laboratory health and safety and quality assurance;
• The EPA-ORD Mentor will provide training in laboratory techniques, theory and operation of advanced laboratory instrumentation, computer data base management, computer applications, library database search techniques, sample preparation, computer model application, as well as many other areas related to laboratory research.

Proposals may not identify EPA cooperators; specific interactions between EPA’s investigators and those of the prospective recipient for cooperative agreements will be negotiated at the time of award.

III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

A. Eligible Applicants This solicitation is available to each State, territory and possession, and Tribal nation of the U.S., including the District of Columbia, public and private universities and colleges, hospitals, laboratories, State and local government departments, other public or private nonprofit institutions, and foreign entities. Profit-making firms are not eligible to receive assistance agreements from the EPA under this program.

Eligible nonprofit organizations include any organizations that: 1) Are operated primarily for scientific, educational, service, charitable or similar purposes in the public interest; 2) Are not organized primarily for profit; and 3) Use its net proceeds to maintain, improve, and/or expand its operations. However, nonprofit organizations described in Section 501(c) (4) of the Internal Revenue Code that lobby are not eligible to apply.

National laboratories funded by Federal Agencies (Federally-Funded Research and Development Centers, "FFRDCs") may not apply. FFRDC employees may cooperate or collaborate with eligible applicants within the limits imposed by applicable legislation and regulations. They may participate in planning, conducting, and analyzing the research directed by the applicant, but may not direct projects on behalf of the applicant organization. The institution, organization, or governance receiving the award may provide funds through its assistance agreement from the EPA to an FFRDC for research personnel, supplies, equipment, and other expenses directly related to the research. However, salaries for permanent FFRDC employees may not be provided through this mechanism.

Federal Agencies may not apply. Federal employees are not eligible to serve in a principal leadership role on an assistance agreement, and may not receive salaries or augment their Agency's appropriations in other ways through awards made under this program.

The applicant institution may enter into an agreement with a Federal Agency to purchase or utilize unique supplies or services unavailable in the private sector to the extent authorized by law. Examples are purchase of satellite data, chemical reference standards, analyses, or use of instrumentation or other facilities not available elsewhere. A written justification for federal involvement must be included in the application. In addition, an appropriate form of assurance that documents the commitment, such as a letter of intent from the Federal Agency involved, should be included.

Potential applicants who are uncertain of their organizational eligibility should contact Ron Josephson ([email protected]); phone: 202-564-7823.

B. Cost sharing Institutional cost-sharing is not required

C. Other Applications must substantially comply with the application submission instructions and requirements set forth in Section IV of this announcement or they will be rejected.  In addition, where a page limitation is expressed in Section IV with respect to parts of the application, pages in excess of the page limit will not be reviewed.  In addition, applications must be submitted through Grants.gov as stated in Section IV of this announcement (except in the limited circumstances where another mode of submission is specifically allowed for as explained in Section IV) on or before the application submission deadline published in Section IV of this announcement. Applicants are responsible for following the submission instructions in Section IV of this announcement (see Section IV.F. “Submission Instructions and Other Submission Requirements” for further information) to ensure that their application is timely submitted. Applications submitted after the submission deadline will be considered late and deemed ineligible without further consideration unless the applicant can clearly demonstrate that it was late due to EPA mishandling or because of technical problems associated with Grants.gov or relevant SAM.gov system issues. An applicant’s failure to timely submit their application through Grants.gov because they did not timely or properly register in SAM.gov or Grants.gov will not be considered an acceptable reason to consider a late submission. Applicants should confirm receipt of their application with the Electronic Submissions Contact shown in this solicitation as soon as possible after the submission deadline—failure to do so may result in your application not being reviewed.

Applications exceeding the funding limits or project period term described herein will be rejected without review.  Further, applications that fail to demonstrate a public purpose of support or stimulation (e.g., by proposing research which primarily benefits a Federal program or provides a service for a Federal agency) will not be funded. 

Applications must propose the training and mentoring of both undergraduate and graduate students. Applications that do not propose the training and mentoring of both undergraduate and graduate students will not be considered.

Further, applications that do not propose trainee participation at EPA-ORD’s Cincinnati facilities will not be considered.

Consistent with Agency regulatory obligations, applicants for and/or recipients of EPA financial assistance are prohibited from discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex and handicap in their programs or activities. Therefore, applications that contain provisions wherein decisions about how to structure and manage a trainee program, including the selection process, may be based on race, color, national origin, sex and handicap will not be considered.

Applications deemed ineligible for funding consideration will be notified within fifteen calendar days of the ineligibility determination.

IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

Additional provisions that apply to this solicitation and/or awards made under this solicitation, including but not limited to those related to confidential business information, contracts and subawards under grants, and proposal assistance and communications, can be found at EPA Solicitation Clauses .

These, and the other provisions that can be found at the website link, are important, and applicants must review them when preparing applications for this solicitation.   If you are unable to access these provisions electronically at the website above, please communicate with the EPA contact listed in this solicitation to obtain the provisions.

A. Grants.gov Submittal Requirements and Limited Exception Procedures Applicants, except as noted below, must apply electronically through Grants.gov under this funding opportunity based on the Grants.gov instructions in this announcement. If an applicant does not have the technical capability to apply electronically through Grants.gov because of limited or no internet access which prevents them from being able to upload the required application materials to Grants.gov , the applicant must contact [email protected] or the address listed below in writing (e.g., by hard copy, email) at least 15 calendar days prior to the submission deadline under this announcement to request approval to submit their application materials through an alternate method.

Mailing Address: OGD Waivers c/o Barbara Perkins USEPA Headquarters William Jefferson Clinton Building 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N. W. Mail Code: 3903R Washington, DC 20460

Courier Address: OGD Waivers c/o Barbara Perkins Ronald Reagan Building 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Rm # 51267 Washington, DC 20004

Funding Opportunity Number (FON) Organization Name and DUNS Organization’s Contact Information (email address and phone number) Explanation of how they lack the technical capability to apply electronically through Grants.gov because of: 1) limited internet access or 2) no internet access which prevents them from being able to upload the required application materials through Grants.gov .

EPA will only consider alternate submission exception requests based on the two reasons stated above and will timely respond to the request -- all other requests will be denied. If an alternate submission method is approved, the applicant will receive documentation of this approval and further instructions on how to apply under this announcement. Applicants will be required to submit the documentation of approval with any initial application submitted under the alternative method. In addition, any submittal through an alternative method must comply with all applicable requirements and deadlines in the announcement including the submission deadline and requirements regarding proposal content and page limits (although the documentation of approval of an alternate submission method will not count against any page limits).

If an exception is granted, it is valid for submissions to EPA for the remainder of the entire calendar year in which the exception was approved and can be used to justify alternative submission methods for application submissions made through December 31 of the calendar year in which the exception was approved (e.g., if the exception was approved on March 1, 2015, it is valid for any competitive or non-competitive application submission to EPA through December 31, 2015). Applicants need only request an exception once in a calendar year and all exceptions will expire on December 31 of that calendar year. Applicants must request a new exception from required electronic submission through Grants.gov for submissions for any succeeding calendar year. For example, if there is a competitive opportunity issued on December 1, 2015 with a submission deadline of January 15, 2016, the applicant would need a new exception to submit through alternative methods beginning January 1, 2016.

Please note that the process described in this section is only for requesting alternate submission methods. All other inquiries about this announcement must be directed to the Agency Contact listed in Section VII of the announcement. Queries or requests submitted to the email address identified above for any reason other than to request an alternate submission method will not be acknowledged or answered.

B. Application Package Information Use the application package available at Grants.gov (see Section IV.F. “Submission Instructions and Other Submission Requirements”).  Note: With the exception of the current and pending support form (available at How to Apply and Required Forms ), all necessary forms are included in the electronic application package. Make sure to include the current and pending support form in your Grants.gov submission.

An email will be sent by EPA to the Principal Investigator (PI) and the Administrative Contact (see below) to acknowledge receipt of the application and transmit other important information.  The email will be sent from [email protected] ; emails to this address will not be accepted.  If you do not receive an email acknowledgement within 10 calendar days of the submission closing date, immediately inform the Electronic Submissions Contact shown in this solicitation.  Failure to do so may result in your application not being reviewed.  See Section IV.F. “Submission Instructions and Other Submission Requirements” for additional information regarding the application receipt acknowledgment.

C. Content and Form of Application Submission

The application is made by submitting the materials described below. Applications must contain all information requested and be submitted in the formats described.

Standard Form 424

The applicant must complete Standard Form 424.  Instructions for completion of the SF424 are included with the form.  (However, note that EPA requires that the entire requested dollar amount appear on the SF424, not simply the proposed first year expenses.)  The form must contain the signature of an authorized representative of the applying organization. 

Applicants are required to provide a unique entity identifier (formerly ‘DUNS number’) when applying for federal grants or cooperative agreements.  Organizations may receive a unique entity identifier, at no cost, by calling the dedicated toll-free request line at 1-866-705-5711, or visiting the website at: Dun & Bradstreet .

Executive Order 12372, “Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs,” does not apply to the Office of Research and Development's research and training programs unless EPA has determined that the activities that will be carried out under the applicants' proposal (a) require an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), or (b) do not require an EIS but will be newly initiated at a particular site and require unusual measures to limit the possibility of adverse exposure or hazard to the general public, or (c) have a unique geographic focus and are directly relevant to the governmental responsibilities of a State or local government within that geographic area.

If EPA determines that Executive Order 12372 applies to an applicant's proposal, the applicant must follow the procedures in 40 CFR Part 29.  The applicant must notify their state's single point of contact (SPOC). To determine whether their state participates in this process, and how to comply, applicants should consult Intergovernmental Review (SPOC List) .  If an applicant is in a State that does not have a SPOC, or the State has not selected research and development grants for intergovernmental review, the applicant must notify directly affected State, area wide, regional and local entities of its proposal.

EPA will notify the successful applicant(s) if Executive Order 12372 applies to its proposal prior to award.  

Key Contacts

The applicant must complete the “Key Contacts” form found in the Grants.gov application package.  An “Additional Key Contacts” form is also available at How to Apply and Required Forms .  The Key Contacts form should also be completed for major sub-agreements (i.e., primary investigators).  Do not include information for consultants or other contractors.  Please make certain that all contact information is accurate.

Table of Contents

Provide a list of the major subdivisions of the application indicating the page number on which each section begins.

Abstract (1 page)

The abstract is a very important document in the review process.   Therefore, it is critical that the abstract accurately describes the training effort being proposed and conveys all the essential elements of the training. 

The abstract should include the information described below (a-g). 

• Funding Opportunity Title and Number for this proposal.
• Project Title: Use the exact title of your project as it appears in the application.  The title must be brief yet represent the major thrust of the project.  Because the title will be used by those not familiar with the project, use more commonly understood terminology.  Do not use general phrases such as “research on.”
• Investigators: List the PI, then the name(s) of each co-PI who will significantly contribute to the project.  Provide a website URL or an email contact address for additional information.
• Institution(s): In the same order as the list of investigators, list the name, city and state of each participating university or other applicant institution.  The institution applying for assistance must be clearly identified.
• Project Period and Location: Show the proposed project beginning and ending dates and the performance site(s)/geographical location(s) where the work will be conducted.
• Project Cost: Show the total funding requested from the EPA (include direct and indirect costs for all years).
• Project Summary: Provide two subsections addressing: (1) the objectives of the project, and (2) the expected results (outputs/outcomes) of the project and how it addresses the needs identified in the solicitation.

Project Narrative (25 pages)

The Project Narrative is the technical proposal that discusses the technical approach and organizational capabilities for accomplishing the objectives stated under Section I.D of this solicitation. It must also address all of the review criteria described in Section V of the announcement.

The project narrative must not exceed twenty-five (25) consecutively numbered (bottom center), 8.5x11-inch pages of single-spaced, standard 12-point type with 1-inch margins.  While these guidelines establish the minimum type size requirements, applicants are advised that readability is of paramount importance and should take precedence in selection of an appropriate font for use in the proposal.  The page limitation for the project narrative shall include all text, tables, figures, references, attachments, and appendices.  Do not refer to institutional websites to address content in the Project Narrative. All sections listed below must be adequately described within the twenty-five (25) page Project Narrative page limit.

The project narrative should provide the following information (Please use section headings provided below):

• Educational and Technical Merit: Describe the educational and technical merit of the research training program being proposed. Describe how a partnership with EPA-ORD-Cincinnati will support EPA’s goal of training the next generation of environmental scientists and engineers.
• Management of Training Program: The proposed approach for managing the training program, including providing financial support to trainees; processes and procedures for matching trainees identified for the training program with the available training opportunities related to EPA-ORD-Cincinnati’s research themes; and providing scientific oversight for the selected trainees’ development of personal training plans and research projects.  EPA-ORD-Cincinnati will designate mentors through the EPA Project Officer. The proposed training program should describe how it will disseminate guidance and provide direction to trainees to ensure they are following the health and safety and quality assurance requirements as described by EPA-ORD Mentors while working at the laboratory; accomplishing the required coursework for their chosen degree without undue interference from their research responsibilities; and receiving the necessary resources to accomplish the proposed research. Training must be conducted at ORD’s Cincinnati facilities on a regular basis with undergraduate trainees working either as summer interns, or throughout academic quarters/semesters with EPA-ORD scientists (mentors) on a part-time or full-time schedule, and graduate trainees undertaking more substantial research projects in collaboration with EPA and university scientists on a part-time or full-time schedule. Applicants should address logistical issues necessary to achieve the objectives of this announcement as described in Section I.
• Recruitment : The proposed approach for competitively advertising traineeships in as wide a manner as practicable and approach for recruiting undergraduate and graduate students of high quality and ability from across the country, including trainees that have an economic disadvantage or that lack exposure to environmental science/environmental information due to underdeveloped environmental science infrastructure at their educational institutions. This process may include partnerships with other institutions. 
• Trainee Selection : The rationale and process for selecting trainees, including trainees that have an economic disadvantage or that lack exposure to environmental science/environmental information due to underdeveloped environmental science infrastructure at their educational institutions. This process may include partnerships with other institutions. The process for receiving, managing, and objectively reviewing applications from students for traineeships. The applicant should describe the selection criteria to be used in the evaluation of potential trainees. Examples of selection criteria are: qualifications, career interests, experience, and academic record. Note that applications must not contain provisions wherein decisions about how to structure and manage a trainee program, including the selection process, may be based on race, color, national origin, sex and handicap.
• Expected Outputs and Outcomes : Describe the expected outputs and outcomes resulting from the training program. Describe the plan for tracking and measuring progress toward achieving the expected environmental outputs and outcomes including those identified in Section I.D. above. 
• Personnel Expertise: The qualifications and competence of the Principal Investigator and key personnel and adequacy of their time commitment to the research training program. Include formal education, training, licenses, or other relevant training as it relates to expertise in conducting and/or overseeing activities described in Section I.
• Financial and Project Management : Describe the approach, procedures, and controls for ensuring that awarded assistance funds will be expended in a timely and efficient manner and how project objectives will be timely and successfully achieved within the project period. Provide program schedules with associated milestones and target dates for completion.
• Budget : Describe how the program budget makes the most efficient use of Agency funds for the collaborative training of undergraduate and graduate students, for instance, by minimizing direct costs for administrative support.
• Facilities and Resources : Describe the facilities and resources (i.e., supplies, training tools) available to support the learning experience of participating trainees.

The past performance and reporting history information is required only for the proposed PI's performance under federally funded assistance agreements (assistance agreements include grants and cooperative agreements but not contracts) similar in size, scope and relevance to the proposed project that the proposed PI performed within the last three years. Note: If no prior past performance information and/or reporting history exists, you will be asked to so state.

The specific information required for each agreement is shown below.

• Name of Granting Agency.
• Grant/Cooperative agreement number.
• Grant/Cooperative agreement title.
• Brief description of the grant/cooperative agreement.
• A description of how the agreement is similar in size, scope and relevance to the proposed project and whether or not it was successfully managed and completed; if not successfully managed and completed, provide an explanation.
• Information relating to the proposed PI's past performance in reporting on progress towards achieving the expected results (outputs/outcomes) under the agreement and meeting reporting requirements under the agreement. Include the history of submitting timely progress/final technical reports, describe how progress towards achieving the expected results was reported/documented, and if such progress was not being made, provide an explanation of whether, and how, this was reported.
• Total (all years) grant/cooperative agreement dollar value.
• Project period.
• Technical contact (project officer), telephone number, and Email address (if available).

Budget and Budget Justification

Prepare a master budget table using “SF-424A Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs” (aka SF-424A), available in the Grants.gov electronic application package and also at How to Apply and Required Forms .  Only complete “Section B-Budget Categories”.   Provide the object class budget category (a. - k.) amounts for each budget year under the “Grant Program, Function or Activity” heading.  Each column reflects a separate budget year.  For example, Column (1) reflects budget year 1.  The total budget will be automatically tabulated in column (5).

Applicants may not use subagreements to transfer or delegate their responsibility for successful completion of their EPA assistance agreement.  Please refer to EPA Solicitation Clauses Contracts and Subawards if your organization intends to identify specific contractors, including consultants, and subawardees in your proposal.

Please note that institutional cost-sharing is not required.

Describe the basis for calculating the personnel, fringe benefits, travel, equipment, supplies, contractual support, and other costs identified in the SF-424A.  The budget justification should not exceed two consecutively numbered (bottom center), 8.5x11-inch pages of single-spaced, standard 12-point type with 1-inch margins.

Budget information should be supported at the level of detail described below:

Below is a sample computation for Personnel:

Note this budget category is limited to persons employed by the applicant organization ONLY.  Those employed elsewhere are classified as subawardees, contractors or consultants. Contractors and consultants should be listed under the “Contractual” budget heading while subawards made to eligible subrecipients are listed under the “Other” budget heading.

• Fringe Benefits: Identify the percentage used and the basis for its computation. Fringe benefits are for the personnel listed in budget category (1) above and only for the percentage of time devoted to the project. Fringe benefits include but are not limited to the cost of leave, employee insurance, pensions and unemployment benefit plans.  The applicant should not combine the fringe benefit costs with direct salaries and wages in the personnel category.

Below is a sample computation for Travel:

• Equipment: Identify all tangible, non-expendable personal property to be purchased that has an estimated cost of $5,000 or more per unit and a useful life of more than one year. It does not include: (1) equipment planned to be leased/rented, including lease/purchase agreements; or (2) equipment service or maintenance contracts. Details such as the type of equipment, cost, and a brief narrative on the intended use of the equipment for project objectives are required. Each item of equipment must be identified with the corresponding cost. General-purpose equipment (office equipment, etc.) must be justified as to how it will be used on the project. (Property items with a unit cost of less than $5,000 are considered supplies.)
• Supplies: “Supplies” means tangible property other than “equipment.” Identify supplies to be used under the project.  This may include: software, office supplies, and laboratory supplies such as reagents, chemicals and glassware. Specifically identify computers to be purchased or upgraded.

Examples of Contractual costs include:

• Consultants – Consultants are individuals with specialized skills who are paid at a daily or hourly rate.  EPA’s participation in the salary rate (excluding overhead) paid to individual consultants retained by recipients or by a recipient's contractors or subcontractors is limited to the maximum daily rate for a Level IV of the Executive Schedule (formerly GS-18), to be adjusted annually.
• Speaker/Trainer Fees – Information on speakers should include the fee and a description of the services they are providing.
• Other: List each item in sufficient detail for the EPA to determine the reasonableness of its cost relative to the research to be undertaken. “Other” items may include publication costs, long distance telephone charges, and photocopying costs.  Note that subawards, such as those with other universities or nonprofit research institutions for members of the research team, are included in this category. Provide the total costs proposed for subawards as a separate line item in the budget justification and brief description of the activities to be supported for each subaward or types of subawards if the subrecipients have not been identified. Subawards may not be used to acquire services from consultants or commercial firms.  Please see EPA Solicitation Clauses Contracts and Subawards for more details.   The “Other” budget category also includes participant support costs such as stipends or travel assistance for trainees (e.g. interns or fellows).     
• Indirect Costs: Indirect costs are those incurred by the applicant for a common or joint purpose that benefit more than one cost objective or project, and are not readily assignable to specific cost objectives or projects as a direct cost. In order for indirect costs to be allowable, the applicant must have a negotiated indirect cost rate (e.g., fixed, predetermined, final or provisional), or must have submitted a proposal to their cognizant agency. If indirect costs are included in the budget, identify the cognizant agency and the approved indirect rate.  If your organization does not have a cognizant agency, please note that in the budget justification and provide a brief explanation for how you calculated your indirect cost rate. 

Provide resumes for each investigator and important co-worker. You may include resumes from staff of subawardees such as universities. Do not include resumes of consultants or other contractors. The resume is not limited to traditional materials, but should provide materials to clearly and appropriately demonstrate that the investigator has the knowledge needed to perform their component of the proposed research.  The resume for each individual must not exceed two consecutively numbered (bottom center), 8.5x11-inch pages of single-spaced, standard 12-point type with 1-inch margins.

Alternative to a standard resume, you may use a profile such as an NIH BioSketch that can be generated in SciENcv (see SciENcv for information on SciENcv; also see My NCBI Curriculum Vitae Web Application: SciENcv ).  These materials should generally conform to the requirements for a resume (e.g., content and page number).

Current and Pending Support

Complete a current and pending support form (provided at How to Apply and Required Forms ) for each investigator and important co-worker.  Do not include current and pending support for consultants or other contractors.  Include all current and pending research regardless of source.

Note to all prospective applicants requiring multiple Current and Pending Support Form pages: Due to a limitation in Adobe Acrobat's forms functionality, additional pages cannot be directly inserted into the original PDF form and preserve the form data on the subsequent pages. Multiple page form submissions can be created in Acrobat 8 and later using the "PDF Package" option in the "Create PDF from Multiple Files" function. If you have an earlier version of Adobe Standard or Professional, applicants will need to convert each PDF page of the form to an EPS (Encapsulated Post Script) file before creating the PDF for submission.   The following steps will allow applicants with earlier versions of Adobe Standard or Professional to create a PDF package:

• Populate the first page of the PDF, and save it as a EPS (Encapsulated Post Script) file.
• Reopen the form, and populate it with the data for page 2. Save this page as a different EPS file.  Repeat for as many pages as necessary.
• Use Acrobat Distiller to convert the EPS files back to PDF.
• Open Acrobat Professional, and combine the individual pages into a combined PDF file.

Guidelines, Limitations, and Additional Requirements

Letters of Intent/Letters of Support

Letters of intent to provide resources for the proposed training or to document intended interactions are limited to one brief paragraph committing the availability of a resource (e.g., use of a person's time or equipment) or intended interaction (e.g., sharing of data, as-needed consultation) that is described in the Project Narrative.  Letters of intent are to be included as an addition to the budget justification documents.  EPA employees are not permitted to provide letters of intent for any application.

Letters of support do not commit a resource vital to the success of the proposal. A letter of support is written by businesses, organizations, or community members stating their support of the applicant's proposed project.  EPA employees are not permitted to provide letters of support for any application.

Note:  Letters of intent or support must be part of the application; letters submitted separately will not be accepted.  Any letter of intent or support that exceeds one brief paragraph (excluding letterhead and salutations), is considered part of the Project Narrative and is included in the 25-page Project Narrative limit.  Any transactions between the successful applicant and parties providing letters of intent or support financed with EPA assistance funds are subject to the contract and subaward requirements described EPA Solicitation Clauses Contracts and Subawards .

Funding Opportunity Number(s) (FON) At various places in the application, applicants are asked to identify the FON. 

The Funding Opportunity Number for this RFA is: Research Training Program for College and University Students, EPA-G2016-ORD-C1

Confidentiality

By submitting an application in response to this solicitation, the applicant grants the EPA permission to make limited disclosures of the application to technical reviewers both within and outside the Agency for the express purpose of assisting the Agency with evaluating the application.  Information from a pending or unsuccessful application will be kept confidential to the fullest extent allowed under law; information from a successful application may be publicly disclosed to the extent permitted by law.

D. Submission Dates and Times Applications must be transferred to Grants.gov no later than 11:59:59 pm Eastern Time on the solicitation closing date.  Applications transferred after the closing date and time will be returned to the sender without further consideration.  EPA will not accept any changes to applications after the closing date.

It should be noted that this schedule may be changed without prior notification because of factors not anticipated at the time of announcement.  In the case of a change in the solicitation closing date, a new date will be posted on EPA’s Research Grants website ( Research Grants ) and a modification posted on Grants.gov .

Solicitation Closing Date: August 16, 2016, 11:59:59 pm Eastern Time (applications must be submitted to Grants.gov by this time, see Section IV.F “Submission Instructions and Other Submission Requirements” for further information).

NOTE: Customarily, applicants are notified about evaluation decisions within six months of the solicitation closing date.  Awards are generally made 6-9 months after the solicitation closing date.

E. Funding Restrictions The funding mechanism for all awards issued under ORD solicitations will consist of assistance agreements from the EPA.  All award decisions are subject to the availability of funds.  In accordance with the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act, 31 U.S.C. 6301 et seq., the primary purpose of an assistance agreement is to accomplish a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized by federal statute, rather than acquisition for the direct benefit or use of the Agency. 

EPA award recipients may incur allowable project costs 90 calendar days before the Federal awarding agency makes the Federal award. Expenses more than 90 calendar days pre-award require prior approval of EPA. All costs incurred before EPA makes the award are at the recipient's risk. EPA is under no obligation to reimburse such costs if for any reason the recipient does not receive a Federal award or if the Federal award is less than anticipated and inadequate to cover such costs.

If you wish to submit applications for more than one ORD funding opportunity you must ensure that the work proposed in each application is significantly different from any other that has been submitted to the EPA or from any other financial assistance you are currently receiving from the EPA or other federal government agency.

Collaborative applications involving more than one institution must be submitted as a single administrative package from one of the institutions involved.

Each proposed project must be able to be completed within the project period and with the initial award of funds.  Applicants should request the entire amount of money needed to complete the project.  Recipients should not anticipate additional funding beyond the initial award of funds for a specific project.

F. Submission Instructions and Other Submission Requirements Please read this entire section before attempting an electronic submission through Grants.gov. 

If you do not have the technical capability to utilize the Grants.gov application submission process for this solicitation, see Section IV.A above for additional guidance and instructions.

Note:  Grants.gov submission instructions are updated on an as-needed basis.  Please provide your Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) with a copy of the following instructions to avoid submission delays that may occur from the use of outdated instructions.

Preparing for Submission.  The electronic submission of your application must be made by an official representative of your institution who is registered with Grants.gov and is authorized to sign applications for Federal assistance.  For more information on the registration requirements that must be completed in order to submit an application through Grants.gov, go to  Grants.gov  and click on “Register” at the top right corner of the page.  If your organization is not currently registered with Grants.gov, please encourage your office to designate an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) and ask that individual to begin the registration process as soon as possible. Please note that the registration process also requires that your organization have a unique entity identifier (formerly ‘DUNS’ number) and a current registration with the System for Award Management (SAM) and the process of obtaining both could take a month or more.  Applicants must ensure that all registration requirements are met in order to apply for this opportunity through Grants.gov and should ensure that all such requirements have been met well in advance of the submission deadline.  Registration on Grants.gov, SAM.gov, and unique entity identifier assignment is FREE.

Applicants need to ensure that the AOR who submits the application through Grants.gov and whose DUNS number is listed on the application is an AOR for the applicant listed on the application. Additionally, the DUNS number listed on the application must be registered to the applicant organization’s SAM account. If not, the application may be deemed ineligible.

To begin the application process under this announcement, go to Grants.gov  and click on “Applicants” on the top of the page and then “Apply for Grants” from the drop-down menu and then follow the instructions accordingly. Please note: To apply through Grants.gov, you must use Adobe Reader software and download the compatible Adobe Reader version. For more information about Adobe Reader, to verify compatibility, or to download the free software, please visit Grants.gov support

You may also be able to access the application package for this announcement by searching for the opportunity on Grants.gov .  Go to Grants.gov and then click on “Search Grants” at the top of the page and enter the Funding Opportunity Number, EPA-G2016-ORD-C1, or the CFDA number that applies to the announcement (CFDA 66.511), in the appropriate field and click the Search button. Alternatively, you may be able to access the application package by clicking on the Package button at the top right of the synopsis page for the announcement on Grants.gov .  To find the synopsis page, go to Grants.gov and click “Browse Agencies” in the middle of the page and then go to “Environmental Protection Agency” to find the EPA funding opportunities.

Acknowledgement of Receipt.  The complete application must be transferred to Grants.gov no later than 11:59:59 pm Eastern Time on the solicitation closing date (see “Submission Dates and Times”).  Applications submitted through Grants.gov will be time and date stamped electronically.  Grants.gov provides an on-screen notification of successful initial transfer as well as an email notification of successful transfer from Grants.gov to EPA.  While it is advisable to retain copies of these Grants.gov acknowledgements to document submission, the only official documentation that the application has been received by EPA is the email acknowledgement sent by EPA to the PI and the Administrative Contact.   This email will be sent from [email protected]; emails to this address will not be accepted.  If an email acknowledgment from [email protected] has not been received within 10 calendar days of the solicitation closing date, immediately inform the Electronic Submissions Contact shown in this solicitation.  Failure to do so may result in your application not being reviewed.

Application Package Preparation.  Your organization’s AOR must submit your complete application package electronically to EPA through Grants.gov ( Grants.gov ) no later than August 16, 2016, 11:59:59 pm Eastern Time. Please allow for enough time to successfully submit your application and allow for unexpected errors that may require you to resubmit.    

Please submit all of the application materials described below using the Grants.gov application package that you downloaded using the instructions above. For additional instructions on completing and submitting the electronic application package, click on the “Show Instructions” tab that is accessible within the application package itself. 

The application package consists of the following mandatory documents. 

• Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424):  Complete the form except for the “competition ID” field.
• EPA Key Contacts Form 5700-54:  Complete the form.  If additional pages are needed, see (d) below.
• SF-424A Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs: Only complete “Section B-Budget Categories”.   Provide the object class budget category (a. - k.) amounts for each budget year under the “Grant Program, Function or Activity” heading.  Each column reflects a separate budget year.
• Project Narrative Attachment Form (click on “Add Mandatory Project Narrative”):  Attach a single electronic PDF file labeled “Application” that contains the items described in Section IV.C.3. through IV.C.9.a [Table of Contents, Abstract, Project Narrative, Budget Justification, Resumes, Current and Pending Support, and Letters of Intent/Support] of this solicitation.  In order to maintain format integrity , this file must be submitted in Adobe Acrobat PDF.   Please review the PDF file for conversion errors prior to including it in the electronic application package; requests to rectify conversion errors will not be accepted if made after the solicitation closing date and time. If Key Contacts Continuation pages (see How to Apply and Required Forms ) are needed, place them before the Table of Contents (Section IV.C.3.).

Once the application package has been completed, the “Submit” button should be enabled.  If the “Submit” button is not active, please call Grants.gov for assistance at 1-800-518-4726.  Applicants who are outside the U.S. at the time of submittal and are not able to access the toll-free number may reach a Grants.gov representative by calling 606-545-5035.  Investigators should save the completed application package with two different file names before providing it to the AOR to avoid having to re-create the package should submission problems be experienced or a revised application needs to be submitted.  Note:  Revised applications must be submitted before the solicitation closing date and time.

Submitting the application.  The application package must be transferred to Grants.gov by an AOR.  The AOR should close all other software before attempting to submit the application package.  Click the “submit” button of the application package. Your Internet browser will launch and a sign-in page will appear.  Note:  Minor problems are not uncommon with transfers to Grants.gov.  It is essential to allow sufficient time to ensure that your application is submitted to Grants.gov BEFORE 11:59:59 pm Eastern Time on the solicitation closing date.   The Grants.gov support desk operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week, except Federal Holidays.

A successful transfer will end with an on-screen acknowledgement.  For documentation purposes, print or screen capture this acknowledgement.  If a submission problem occurs, reboot the computer – turning the power off may be necessary – and re-attempt the submission. 

Note:  Grants.gov issues a “case number” upon a request for assistance.

Transmission Difficulties.  If transmission difficulties that result in a late transmission, no transmission, or rejection of the transmitted application are experienced, and following the above instructions do not resolve the problem so that the application is submitted to Grants.gov by the deadline date and time, follow the guidance below.  The Agency will make a decision concerning each late submission on a case-by-case basis as to whether it should be forwarded for technical review.  All emails, as described below, are to be sent to Debra M. Jones ([email protected]) with the FON in the subject line.

Be aware that EPA will only consider accepting applications that were unable to transmit due to Grants.gov or relevant Sam.gov system issues or for unforeseen exigent circumstances, such as extreme weather interfering with internet access. Failure of an applicant to submit timely because they did not properly or timely register in SAM.gov or Grants.gov is not an acceptable reason to justify acceptance of a late submittal.

Please note that if the application you are submitting is greater than 70 MB in size, please call or send an email message to the Electronic Submissions Contact listed for this RFA.  The Agency may experience technical difficulty downloading files of this size from Grants.gov.  Therefore, it is important that the Agency verify that the file can be downloaded.  The Agency will provide alternate submission instructions if the file cannot be downloaded.

• If you are experiencing problems resulting in an inability to upload the application to Grants.gov, it is essential to call Grants.gov for assistance at 1-800-518-4726 before the application deadline.  Applicants who are outside the U.S. at the time of submittal and are not able to access the toll-free number may reach a Grants.gov representative by calling 606-545-5035.  Be sure to obtain a case number from Grants.gov.  If the problems stem from unforeseen exigent circumstances unrelated to Grants.gov, such as extreme weather interfering with internet access, contact Debra M. Jones ([email protected]).
• Unsuccessful transfer of the application package: If a successful transfer of the application cannot be accomplished even with assistance from Grants.gov due to electronic submission issues or unforeseen exigent circumstances, send an email message to Debra M. Jones ([email protected]) by 11:59:59 pm Eastern Time on the solicitation closing date. The email message must document the problem and include the Grants.gov case number as well as the entire application in PDF format as an attachment.
• Grants.gov rejection of the application package:  If a notification is received from Grants.gov stating that the application has been rejected for reasons other than late submittal, promptly send an email to Debra M. Jones ([email protected]) with the FON in the subject line within one business day of the closing date of this solicitation.  The email should include any materials provided by Grants.gov and attach the entire application in PDF format.

V. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION

A. Technical Review All eligible applications will be evaluated by EPA reviewers based on the criteria and process described below. The purpose is to evaluate the scientific merit of the proposal and the capability of the applicant to complete the project as proposed.  Each application will be rated under a points system, with a total of 100 points possible. The individual scores of the EPA reviewers will be added up and then averaged resulting in a final average score per application.  Applications will be ranked in accordance with the final score.  Preliminary funding recommendations will be provided to the selection official based on this ranking.

The following criteria will be used to evaluate eligible proposals:

• The degree to which the proposed training program is feasible and relevant to EPA’s goal of training the next generation of environmental scientists and engineers and the degree to which the proposed training program has educational and technical merit. (10 points)
• The degree to which the application provides a reasonable and appropriate approach for managing the training program, including providing financial support to trainees; proposes reasonable and appropriate processes and procedures for matching trainees identified for the training program with the available training opportunities related to EPA-ORD-Cincinnati’s research themes; and provides scientific oversight for the selected trainees’ development of personal training plans and research projects. Under this criterion, the Agency will also evaluate the extent to which applicants address logistical issues necessary to achieve the objective of this announcement as described in Section I. (20 points)
• The degree to which the training program adequately describes dissemination of guidance and provides direction to trainees to ensure they are following the health and safety and quality assurance requirements as described by EPA-ORD Mentors while working at the EPA laboratory; accomplishing the required coursework for their chosen degree without undue interference from their research responsibilities; and receiving the necessary resources to accomplish the proposed research.  (5 points)
• The degree to which the application demonstrates how the applicant will competitively advertise traineeships in as wide a manner as practicable and recruit undergraduate and graduate students of high quality and ability from across the country, including students that have an economic disadvantage or lack exposure to environmental science/environmental information due to underdeveloped environmental science infrastructure at their educational institutions. This process may include partnerships with other institutions. (10 points)
• The degree to which the application provides a detailed rationale and process for selecting trainees, including trainees that have an economic disadvantage or that lack exposure to environmental science/environmental information due to underdeveloped environmental science infrastructure at their educational institutions. This process may include partnerships with other institutions. The degree to which the application adequately describes the process for receiving, managing, and objectively reviewing applications from students for traineeships including descriptions of the selection criteria to be used in the evaluation of potential trainees. (10 points)
• The degree to which expected outputs and outcomes resulting from the project are adequately described. The degree to which the applicant’s plan for tracking and measuring progress toward achieving the expected environmental outputs and outcomes including those identified in Section I.D is well defined. (10 points)
• The degree to which the application demonstrates that the Principal Investigator and other key personnel have the appropriate expertise and qualifications to competently manage the training program (includes formal education, training, licenses, or other relevant training as it relates to expertise in conducting and/or overseeing activities described in Section I).  The degree to which the Principal Investigator’s and other key personnel’s time commitment is adequate to successfully achieve the goals of the proposed training program. (10 points)
• The degree to which the approach, procedures, and controls for ensuring timely and efficient expenditure of awarded assistance funds are well defined and acceptable. The degree to which the approach for ensuring timely and successful achievement of project objectives is adequate and in accordance with the project narrative’s schedule and milestones. The degree to which the budget structure is cost-effective, including how the project budget makes the most efficient use of Agency funds for the collaborative training of trainees, for instance, by minimizing direct costs for administrative support. (10 points)
• The degree to which the applicant’s resources and facilities (i.e., supplies, training tools) are available and adequate to support the learning experience of participating trainees. (5 points)

The EPA will evaluate the proposed PI's past performance under prior Federal assistance agreements (assistance agreements include grants and cooperative   agreements but not contracts) performed within the last three years that were similar in size, scope and relevance to the proposed project in two areas:  First, in successfully managing and completing these prior assistance agreements, including whether there is a satisfactory explanation for any lack of success. Second, in meeting reporting requirements under the prior agreements and reporting progress toward achieving results (outputs/outcomes) under these agreements, including the proposed PI's history of submitting timely progress/final technical reports that adequately describe the progress toward achieving the expected results under the agreements. Any explanation of why progress toward achieving the results was not made will also be considered.

If the proposed PI has no relevant or available past performance and/or reporting   information, the applicant will be given a neutral rating (5 points) for those criteria.  In evaluating applicants under this criterion the Agency may consider information from other sources including agency files and prior/current grantors (e.g., to verify and/or supplement the information provided by the applicant).

B. Funding Decisions Final funding decisions are made by EPA-ORD management based on the results of the technical review. In addition, in making the final funding decisions, EPA-ORD management may also consider program balance and available funds. Applicants selected for funding will be required to provide additional information listed below under “Award Notices.” The application will then be forwarded to EPA’s Grants and Interagency Agreement Management Division for award in accordance with the EPA’s procedures.

C. Additional Provisions for Applicants Incorporated into the Solicitation Additional provisions that apply to this solicitation and/or awards made under this solicitation including the clause on Reporting and Use of Information Concerning Recipient Integrity and Performance can be found at EPA Solicitation Clauses . These, and the other provisions that can be found at the website link, are important, and applicants must review them when preparing proposals for this solicitation.   If you are unable to access these provisions electronically at the website above, please communicate with the EPA contact listed in this solicitation to obtain the provisions .

VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

A. Award Notices Customarily, applicants are notified about evaluation decisions within six months of the solicitation closing date. 

Applicants to be recommended for funding will be required to submit additional certifications and an electronic version of the revised project abstract.  They may also be asked to provide responses to comments or suggestions offered by the reviewers and/or submit a revised budget.  EPA Project Officers will contact the PI to obtain these materials.  Before or after an award, applicants may be required to provide additional quality assurance documentation.

The official notification of an award will be made by the Agency’s Grants and Interagency Agreement Management Division.  Applicants are cautioned that only a grants officer is authorized to bind the Government to the expenditure of funds; preliminary selection by ORD management does not guarantee an award will be made.  For example, statutory authorization, funding, or other issues discovered during the award process may affect the ability of EPA to make an award to an applicant.  The award notice, signed by an EPA grants officer, is the authorizing document and will be provided through electronic or postal mail.

B. Disputes Disputes related to this assistance agreement competition will be resolved in accordance with the dispute resolution procedures set forth in 70 FR 3629, 3630 (January 26, 2005) which can be found at Grant Competition Dispute Resolution Procedures .  Questions regarding disputes may be referred to the Eligibility Contact identified below.

C. Administrative and National Policy Requirements Additional provisions that apply to this solicitation and/or awards made under this solicitation, including but not limited to those related to unique entity identifier, SAM, copyrights, disputes, and administrative capability, can be found at EPA Solicitation Clauses .

These, and the other provisions that can be found at the website link, are important, and applicants must review them when preparing applications for this solicitation.  If you are unable to access these provisions electronically at the website above, please communicate with the EPA contact listed in this solicitation to obtain the provisions.

Expectations and responsibilities of ORD cooperative agreement holders are summarized in this section, although the terms grant and grantee are used. 

• Meetings: Principal Investigators will be expected to budget for, and participate in, All-Investigators Meetings (also known as progress reviews) approximately once per year with EPA scientists and other grantees to report on cooperative agreement activities and discuss issues of mutual interest. 
• Approval of Changes after Award: Prior written approval of changes may be required from EPA. Examples of these changes are contained in 2 CFR 200.308.  Note: prior written approval is also required from the EPA Award Official for incurring costs more than 90 calendar days prior to award.

Human Subjects: A grant applicant must agree to comply with all applicable provisions of EPA Regulation 40 CFR Part 26 (Protection of Human Subjects).  In addition, grant applicants must agree to comply with EPA’s procedures for oversight of the recipient’s compliance with 40 CFR Part 26, as given in EPA Order 1000.17A (Policy and Procedures on Protection of Human Research Subjects in EPA Conducted or Supported Research).  As per this Order, no human subject may be involved in any research conducted under this assistance agreement, including recruitment, until the research has been approved or determined to be exempt by the EPA Human Subjects Research Review Official (HSRRO) after review of the approval or exemption determination of the Institutional Review Board(s) (IRB(s)) with jurisdiction over the research under 40 CFR Part 26. Following the initial approvals indicated above, the recipient must, as part of the progress report(s), provide evidence of continuing review and approval of the research by the IRB(s) with jurisdiction, as required by 40 CFR 26.109(e).

Guidance for investigators conducting EPA-funded research involving human subjects may be obtained here:

Basic Information about Human Subjects Research Electronic Code of Federal Regulations

Data Access and Information Release: After award, all data produced under the award must be made available to the ORD Project Officer without restriction and be accompanied by comprehensive metadata documentation adequate for specialists and non-specialists alike to be able to understand how and where the data were obtained and to evaluate the quality of the data.  If requested, the data products and their metadata must be provided to the ORD Project Officer in a standard exchange format no later than the due date of the cooperative agreement’s final report or the publication of the data product's associated results, whichever comes first.

Congress, through OMB, has instructed each federal agency to implement Information Quality Guidelines designed to "provide policy and procedural guidance...for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information, including statistical information, disseminated by Federal agencies." The EPA's implementation may be found at Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility and Integrity of Information Disseminated by the Environmental Protection Agency .  These procedures may apply to data generated by grant recipients if those data are disseminated as described in the Guidelines.

Reporting:  The recipient must agree to provide quarterly performance progress reports and a final report.  The reports should be submitted electronically to the Technical Contact named in Section VII of this announcement.

The recipient must also agree to provide copies of, or acceptable alternate access to (e.g., web link), any peer reviewed journal article(s) resulting from the cooperative agreement during the project period. In addition, the recipient should notify the ORD Project Officer of any papers published after completion of the cooperative agreement that were based on activities supported by the cooperative agreement. 

• Policy and Program Requirements for the Mandatory Agency-wide Quality System, EPA CIO 2105.0, May 2000; and
• EPA Quality Manual for Environmental Programs, EPA CIO 2105-P-01-0,   May 2000.

Trainees who are engaged in scientific research, including laboratory work must:

• Meet with the organization’s Quality Assurance Manager (QAM),
• Work under an approved quality assurance project plan (QAPP),
• As appropriate, use standard operating procedures (SOPs).

Acknowledgement of EPA Support: EPA’s full or partial support must be acknowledged in journal articles, oral or poster presentations, news releases, interviews with reporters and other communications.  Any documents developed under this agreement that are intended for distribution to the public or inclusion in a scientific, technical, or other journal shall include the following statement:

This publication [article] was developed under Assistance Agreement No.________ awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to [ name of recipient ].  It has not been formally reviewed by EPA.  The views expressed in this document are solely those of [ name of recipient or names of authors ] and do not necessarily reflect those of the Agency.  EPA does not endorse any products or commercial services mentioned in this publication.

VII. AGENCY CONTACTS

Further information, if needed, may be obtained from the EPA contacts indicated below. Information regarding this RFA obtained from sources other than these Agency Contacts may not be accurate. Email inquiries are preferred.

• Research Grants Home
• Funding Opportunities
• Air Research Grants
• Climate Change Research Grants
• Ecosystems Research Grants
• Health Research Grants
• Safer Chemicals Research Grants
• Sustainability Research Grants
• Water Research Grants
• Research Grants Events
• About Research Grants

General Pediatrics Residency Program

• Research: Clinical Departments
• Pediatrics: Home
• Pediatrics: Education & Training
• Pediatrics: Education & Training > Residency Programs
• Pediatrics: Education & Training > Residency Programs > General Pediatrics Residency Program

Our Program

We believe in providing residents with a top-notch, broad-based educational experience in a collegial environment. Our philosophy has earned us a reputation as a resident-friendly program. We offer aspiring physicians unique and exciting training opportunities. Training takes place at the UCI Medical Center and CHOC in Orange, and Miller Children’s & Women’s Hospital in Long Beach.

• Meet Our Residents
• Program Leadership
• How to Apply

Core Values & Aims

Our program’s core values include a commitment to developing highly skilled, well-balanced pediatricians and leaders in both primary care and specialty medicine — in our community and beyond — in line with UCI School of Medicine’s overarching vision: Discover. Teach. Heal. We provide trainees with a broad-based educational experience directed at providing the highest quality care for our diverse patient population through expansive opportunities in a collegial and supportive setting. The aims of our program are as follows:

residents to become outstanding clinicians, providing team-based care, serving as advocates in diverse inpatient and ambulatory clinical settings.

residents to grow into capable physician-advocates to become champions in health equity and leaders for child health.

individualized achievement in the core tenets of discover, teach and heal through our extensive resources and faculty pool.

resident aptitude to teach and educate by providing tools and opportunities to engage in medical education and become mentors and role models for the next generation of healthcare advocates and providers.

residents to grow professionally and personally through diligence and inquiry in an environment that fosters camaraderie and resiliency.

a desire for lifelong learning through habit, modeling and fostering a growth mindset.

Residency Life

Our program believes in the importance of training outstanding pediatric residents while supporting a balanced life outside of work. Follow us for a glimpse into life as a UCI/CHOC pediatrics resident.

Medical Scientist Training Program

Teni Ogunsan (she/her)

Email: oluwateniayo(dot)ogunsan(at)vanderbilt(dot)edu (substitute symbols where appropriate)

Hometown: Laurel, MD

Undergraduate Institution: University of Maryland, Baltimore County

Research Interests: I am interested in biomedical informatics (particularly working with electronic health records and building algorithms) and integrating it with women’s health.

Hobbies/Interests: nature walks, bird watching, crocheting/knitting, singing/playing the piano, traveling

Comments are closed

• About the School
• Quick Facts
• Administration
• Basic Sciences
• A-Z Directory
• Contact Information
• Campus Maps & Parking

• Current Students
• Basic Sciences Faculty Affairs
• Clinical Faculty Affairs
• Eskind Biomedical Library
• People Finder

Robert W. Finberg Physician-Scientist Training Program launching at UMass Chan

New program aims to bridge internal medicine residency and basic science research for md/phd graduates.

By Pat Sargent

The Robert W. Finberg Physician-Scientist Training Program is named in honor of the late Robert W. Finberg, MD, chair  emeritus  and distinguished professor of medicine, who was a highly accomplished physician, infectious disease researcher and teacher whose career spanned four decades. He served as chair of the Department of Medicine at UMass Chan for 21 years. Dr. Finberg died in 2021.

The new program was initiated by David McManus, MD’02, MSc’12, the  Richard M. Haidack Professor of Medicine , chair and professor of medicine; and Katherine Fitzgerald, PhD, the  Worcester Foundation for Biomedical Research Chair III , professor of medicine, associate vice provost for basic science research, vice chair of research in the Department of Medicine, chief of the Division of Innate Immunity and director of the Program in Innate Immunity.

“Over the past several years, we’ve built on a really strong foundation that Dr. Finberg had developed in the Department of Medicine in both basic science and clinical research excellence. We’ve recruited several new chiefs into leadership roles, who run their own labs and are great exemplars of what it means to be a physician-scientist,” Dr. McManus said.

McManus said they decided to create a formal training program because such a program is sought after by many graduating MD/PhD students, including those from UMass Chan, who pursue residencies that already offer a similar program.

McManus said the new program exists due in large part to the strong foundation of the existing internal medicine residency program and the Internal Medicine Residency Research Track , as well as the support of Scott Kopec, MD, associate professor of medicine and program director of the internal medicine residency program; and Pang-Yen Fan, MD, professor of medicine and vice chair of education in the Division of Renal Medicine.

McManus said the Department of Medicine wanted to create a more comprehensive program that offers training to physician-scientists. “I think it keeps a lot of our scientists here and they’re happy when they get to work with talented trainees,” he said.

Read Pukkila-Worley, MD, professor of medicine, associate director of the Medical Scientist (MD/PhD) training program and director of the Finberg Physician-Scientist Training Program, said, “Considering our incredible prowess in basic science, translational science, disease-oriented research on our campus, creating such a program is a huge win for UMass Chan, because we use these resources to train our future physician-scientists.”

Dr. Pukkila-Worley said the program is targeting all physician-scientists in the United States and the department hopes to leverage UMass Chan’s research reputation to recruit people who want to take advantage of the campus’ training environment to further their careers in medicine.

“The Finberg Physician-Scientist Training Program starts with internal medicine residency training, and then clinical training in a subspecialty, such as cardiology, infectious disease or hematology/oncology. From there, we have established a codified research experience where physician-scientist training program trainees will work under the mentorship of research faculty on our campus. The goal is for our trainees to establish their own academic footprints to launch their careers as independent physicians,” Pukkila-Worley said.

The program is in its first admissions cycle, with applications open until Sept. 24, and will accept two residents on Match Day, March 21, 2025.

“We want our first class to be exceptional, because they will be the flag bearers for our program,” Pukkila-Worley said. “The major initiative now is to try to recruit the best applicants we possibly can.”

The program offers significant incentives, including a guaranteed match into the fellowship program, a guaranteed salary for three years of research training, extensive mentoring and a path to tenure track faculty position at UMass Chan.

Related UMass Chan news

Match Day 2024 at UMass Chan: ‘Excited about the future . . . and the patients I will serve’

UMass Chan investigators identify new pattern recognition system that monitors disease-causing bacteria in C. elegans

Inaugural Finberg memorial award winners to present at Innate Immunity Day

Sign up for weekly news emails

• GRANTS & FUNDING HOME
• ABOUT GRANTS
• POLICY & COMPLIANCE
• NEWS & EVENTS

Division of Biomedical Research Workforce

• The Biomedical Research Workforce
• Reports on the Biomedical Research Workforce
• Extramural Diversity
• Undergraduate
• Graduate/​Doctorate
• Postdoctoral/​Residency
• Early Career
• Established Investigator
• Fellowships
• Career Development
• Other Training-Related
• Research Education
• Institute/​Program Matrix
• Resources  

Undergraduate and Postbaccalaureate Education

College and postbaccalaureate  students identify their academic strengths and interests, and begin identifying an appropriate career. Students interested in biomedical science may be majoring in a science field, or “pre-med,” or in the liberal arts.

NIH Programs for Undergraduate Students

Become an appointee on institutional awards:.

Research Education Program

For support to develop and/or implement a program as it relates to a category in one or more of the areas of education, information, training, technical assistance, coordination, or evaluation.

Ruth L. Kirschstein Undergraduate NRSA Institutional Research Training Grants

To enhance the undergraduate research training of individuals from groups underrepresented in biomedical and behavioral sciences through Institutional NRSA training grants, in preparation for research doctorate degree programs.

Ruth L. Kirschstein Interdisciplinary Research Training Award (T90) and combined Research Education Grant (R90)

To support comprehensive interdisciplinary research training programs at the undergraduate, predoctoral and/or postdoctoral levels, by capitalizing on the infrastructure of existing multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research programs.

Become an appointee on your Supervisor's grant:

Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research (Admin Supp)

Administrative supplements to currently active NIH research grants to enhance the diversity of the research workforce.

Stipend Levels & Info

• NIH Policies for NRSA Stipends, Compensation and Other Income
• NRSA Stipends (FY 2024)
• NRSA Stipends (FY 2023)
• Stipend/Salary FAQs

Policy Notices

• NOT-OD-24-129: Updates to NIH Institutional Training Grant Applications for Due Dates on or After January 25, 2025
• NOT-OD-24-116: Childcare Costs for Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) Individual Fellows and Institutional Research Training Awards
• NOT-OD-24-107: Implementation of Revisions to the NIH and AHRQ Fellowship Application and Review Process
• NOT-OD-24-084: Overview of Grant Application and Review Changes for Due Dates on or after January 25, 2025
• NOT-OD-23-111: Reminder – NIH Policies for NRSA Stipends, Compensation and Other Income
• NOT-OD-23-076: Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) Stipends, Tuition/Fees and Other Budgetary Levels Effective for Fiscal Year 2023

Home About DBRW Career Path Programs Institute/​Program Matrix Resources FAQ HHS Vulnerability Disclosure Disclaimer Contact Us

NIH Grants and Funding National Institutes of Health U.S. Department of Health and Human Services USA.gov – Government Made Easy

Older Versions of this Page

June 20, 2024

Related Announcements

• April 21, 2022  - Fogarty HIV Research Training Program for Low-and Middle-Income Country Institutions (D43 Clinical Trial Optional). See NOFO  PAR-22-151
• April 21, 2022  - Planning Grant for Fogarty HIV Research Training Program for Low- and Middle-Income Country Institutions (D71 Clinical Trial Not Allowed). See NOFO  PAR-22-152

The Fogarty International Center (FIC) will hold a free pre-application interactive Q&A webinar for the FIC Planning Grant for Fogarty HIV Research Training Program for Low- and Middle-Income Country Institutions (D71) and Fogarty HIV Research Training Program for Low-and Middle-Income Country Institutions (D43 Clinical Trial Optional) funding opportunity (see “Related Announcements, above). The next submission deadline is August 22, 2024. The FIC Program Officer will discuss the D71 and D43 funding opportunities at the webinar and will provide a broad overview of the program goals and details pertaining to the application requirements. There will be time set aside to answer questions from the attendees and potential applicants. 

 Date of virtual webinar – July 15, 2024, 9 AM – 10:30 AM EST 

All potential applicants (new and those considering re-submissions) are encouraged to attend the webinar. Participation in the webinar meeting, although encouraged, is optional and is not required for the submission of an application in response to the NOFO.

Potential applicants are encouraged to submit their questions ahead of the meeting at  [email protected] .

Webinar information:

 Please Register for the FIC D71 and D43 Program Pre-Application Webinar at https://nih.zoomgov.com/meeting/register/vJIsdeyqpz8jGhsVw4NzXZvAbn9lxnAY4xw .  

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.

Please direct all inquiries to:

Geetha Bansal, Ph.D.  Fogarty International Center (FIC) Email:  [email protected]

Note: For help accessing PDF, RTF, MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Audio or Video files, see Help Downloading Files .

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Research: The Most Common DEI Practices Actually Undermine Diversity

• Traci Sitzmann,
• Shoshana Schwartz,
• Mary Lee Stansifer

Organizations over-rely on approaches that consistently fail to diversify management ranks — and overlook those that have proven effective.

While companies say they champion diversity, there are glaring disparities in diverse representation within managerial ranks. The authors examine the impact of various management practices on diverse representation in managerial roles and how often each management practice is utilized in organizations, shedding light on why organizations are not making greater progress toward diverse representation. Despite not working well for attaining diverse representation, diversity training is widely used in organizations. In contrast, formal mentoring programs and targeted recruitment are effective for increasing diverse representation but are underused. Indeed, the relationship between how often management practices are implemented in organizations and their effectiveness in attaining diverse representation is negative and strong. This article breaks down the practices organizations should utilize to achieve diverse representation, underscoring the need to shift toward practices that increase diverse representation in management.

Despite the U.S. population’s growing diversity , managerial roles are still predominantly held by white men. While the largest firms have been pledging to recruit and train Black workers for over 40 years, there has been little increase in Black representation in managerial roles during this timeframe. In a 2021 analysis , Black employees held only 7% of managerial roles despite comprising 14% of all employees. Women have difficulty attaining leadership roles despite evidence that “women are more likely than men to lead in a style that is effective.”

• TS Traci Sitzmann is a Professor of Management and Workforce Development Scholar at the University of Colorado Denver.
• SS Shoshana Schwartz is an Assistant Professor of Management at Christopher Newport University’s Luter School of Business.
• MS Mary Lee Stansifer is an Assistant Teaching Professor at the University of Colorado Denver.

Partner Center

Jay Z wants school vouchers in Pa. The move is 'infuriating' to some.

Philadelphia parents learned about school choice on Friday at a lunch provided by an unusual benefactor: Jay Z's entertainment company Roc Nation.

The A-lister is making his final push in a campaign to urge Pennsylvania lawmakers to spend millions on school vouchers ahead of the state's budget deadline, June 30. The vouchers would entitle families to use public funds traditionally used for public schools toward private and parochial schools.

Jay Z's New York-based entertainment company announced this month it was backing a $100 million private school choice program in Pennsylvania.

Desiree Perez, Roc Nation's CEO, said the state's public school system doesn't work for some disadvantaged students, and their families deserve unfettered access to alternative options, including high-performing private schools.

"It's an immediate need," Perez said.

Jay Z was not available to comment.

The free meals, training sessions, advertising and advocacy from the entertainment mogul sparked criticism from public school advocates and national figures who said school vouchers hurt students of color and low-income students. They worry that public schools will lose vital funding: They said schools need all the cash they can get.

A recent court ruling indicates the state has not provided sufficient resources for all students. The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania ruled last year that the state's funding system was fundamentally unfair to public school students , and the court directed the state to increase public school funding. Also, earlier this month, the state House passed a plan to spend billions more in state funds on public schools, the Associated Press reported .

Amid the added pressure from the court, the state's impending decisions about spending on public education could be a "historic moment," said Dan Urevick-Ackelsberg, a senior attorney at the Public Interest Law Center which sued the state, alleging unfair funding. He said he and others will "be back in court" if they feel the state doesn't allocate fair funding in its budget decisions.

After the legal victory against the school system, Urevick-Ackelsberg said, Jay Z's activism comes at a particularly inopportune moment.

The lawyers, he said, were "right on the verge" of overhauling Pennsylvania's system of education "when an out-of-state billionaire comes in and says, instead 'Let's enact school vouchers.' It's crazy ... infuriating."

Roc Nation officials have said they also support public schools, but the organization backs school choice as "a strategic, near-term solution" to help low-performing kids.

The argument over vouchers has been around for years.

Many states recently passed laws expanding school choice, through vouchers, education savings accounts, refundable tax credits and tax-credit scholarships.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order in 2020 allowing states to spend federal funds on school vouchers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many Republican lawmakers , conservative parents rights groups like Moms for Liberty and other school choice advocates say parents should have access to all options when deciding where to send their kids to school.

What Jay Z said about school access

Roc Nation announced earlier this month it would support several Pennsylvania bills calling for funding that could be used toward private schools. The company hosted informational sessions in Philadelphia to teach parents and voters about the Pennsylvania Award for Student Success program, encouraging them to share their support for it with legislators. If the measure passes, the program would grant scholarships to families of students at the state's lowest-performing schools. These families could use the funds to attend private schools and to cover other school-related fees.

State Sen. Patrick Stefano, a Republican from Western Pennsylvania, sponsored one of the measures, which calls for taxpayer funding. The state's Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro has also said he supports the Stefano bill, according to Chalkbeat Philadelphia . A related bill was introduced by Democratic Sen. Tony Williams of Philadelphia. It calls for $300 million towards school choice scholarships instead of the $100 million in the measure Jay Z has publicly backed.

The program Jay Z is backing is also supported by Republican billionaire, megadonor and voucher advocate Jeffrey Yass .

Roc Nation has previously contributed to private schools through the company's Shawn Carter scholarship program , which grants eligible students money for tuition and other school costs, Perez said.

The case against vouchers

One of the largest teachers unions in the nation and the largest in Pennsylvania both said the state should focus on funding the public school system.

Following Jay Z's announcement supporting school vouchers, Randi Weingarten , head of The American Federation of Teachers, wrote in a statement: "Vouchers are, in effect, a tax cut for the rich – with most going to wealthy families who have never even been part of the public school system. They are bankrupting state budgets and leading to closed schools and programs – in Florida and elsewhere."

"Instead of spending billions on vouchers in Philly, we should be strengthening and investing in public schools so all kids can thrive," Weingarten said.

Aaron Chapin, president of the Pennsylvania State Education Association, has said the state should focus on funding its public schools.

"We shouldn’t even think about sending taxpayer money to private and religious schools when our focus should be on fixing Pennsylvania’s unconstitutional public school funding system,” Chapin wrote.

The fundamental questions for families should be what entity should be providing public education and the purpose of public education, said Erika K. Wilson, a law professor and education researcher focused on equity issues at the University of North Carolina School of Law. The purpose should be to make Americans better citizens and improve our democracy, and public schooling is the avenue for that, she said.

Black parents have a legitimate gripe about the low performance rates and underfunding of their public schools, she said, and Jay Z and Roc Nation's support for private schools as an alternative might look good on its face. But market mechanisms for education are infused with a lot of racial bias, hurt Black communities, in her view.

"If Jay Z really wanted to help, why not partner with public schools and create community schools with wraparound services?" she said.

What’s new in the school voucher discussion?

School choice programs in the U.S. date back to at least 1869.

That year Vermont created its town-tuition program , which provided scholarships to students in towns without public schools, which could be used at public or private schools. In 1991, Wisconsin implemented the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, the first modern school voucher program, according to the nonprofit EdChoice. The program grants low- and middle-income families educational vouchers to pay for private schools "they couldn't otherwise afford," according to School Choice Wisconsin.

More recently, school choice advocates won support for state-funded voucher and educational scholarship programs with backing from parents upset about COVID-19 pandemic-related closures. Some parents unenrolled their kids from their neighborhood public schools and moved them to other types of schools, including private schools, home schools and charter schools. Many kept them in those schools , and some in states with voucher and scholarship programs have used state dollars to pay for alternative options.

What it means for students and schools: School choice remains popular following COVID closures

At least 29 states and the District of Columbia have some form of school choice program, according an Education Week analysis . This year at least six states – Alabama , Louisiana , Georgia , Missouri , Nebraska and Utah – enacted new school choice programs or expanded previously existing ones, according to the nonprofit EdChoice, which supports school choice.

EdChoice is tracking 83 bills in 30 states this year related to education savings accounts, vouchers, refundable tax credits and tax-credit scholarships, said Chantal Lovell Fennell, a spokesperson for the organization.

What research reveals about voucher programs

Roc Nation's position on school choice is idealistic but not realistic, said Kevin Welner, a professor of educational policy and law at the University of Colorado Boulder.

Research has shown that students who use voucher programs to leave a public school and attend a private school do worse academically, especially in math, Welner said. He cited several studies , including one that showed students who participated in the Indiana Choice Scholarship Program performed worse in mathematics during their first year attending a private school compared with similar students who remained in public schools.

"From my perspective as a researcher, it's incomprehensible that we’re still pursuing these policies that are showing to be so harmful," Welner said. "The explanation for that, I think, is that billionaires really love the idea, like Jeffrey Yass. I think of Betsy Devos pushing it for years, and Donald Trump, and now we have Jay Z."

School choice legislation is being pushed, he thinks, "not because of evidence, but because of a lot of billionaires who have a lot of wealthy interests in them."

"Part of it is I think is an ideological faith in getting rid of public institutions and moving toward a deregulated free market," Welner said.

Joshua Cowan, an education policy professor who has spent nearly two decades studying choice programs, cited findings showing students lose ground in academic achievement in an article for The Brookings Institute .

In the meantime, Jay Z's organization plans to continue educating parents about their options, Perez said, even if doing so means, "We’ve become the public enemy."

Contact Kayla Jimenez at [email protected]. Follow her on X at @kaylajjimenez.