ARRA CHARN Central Data Management Coordination Center | Apply Online

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1) What is the ARRA CHARN Central Data Management Coordination Center (CDMCC) opportunity (HRSA-10-206)?

HRSA-10-206 was a discretionary, Recovery Act (ARRA)-funded cooperative agreement administered by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA). The purpose was to build national data infrastructure to support Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) in safety net settings by funding a single Central Data Management Coordinating Center (CDMCC) to anchor the Community Health Applied Research Network (CHARN).

2) What was the main goal of funding a single CDMCC?

The main goal was to create a shared backbone that allowed CHARN to function as an integrated research and data enterprise rather than four separate, isolated projects. The CDMCC was intended to standardize and coordinate work across the network so multi-site CER could be conducted using consistent, high-quality, comparable data and methods.

3) How was CHARN structured under this opportunity?

CHARN was structured as four separately funded Research Nodes plus one centrally funded coordinating entity (the CDMCC). The Research Nodes were described as health center-led consortia of safety net providers working in partnership with one or more academic institutions, while the CDMCC served as the coordinating and data management hub for the entire network.

4) What were the three major areas the CDMCC was expected to coordinate and standardize?

The CDMCC was expected to coordinate and standardize work across all nodes in three major areas:

• Administrative support for inter-node coordination functions
• Centralized data management
• Technical assistance in study design, data infrastructure, and analytic methods

5) What did the administrative support role include?

Administrative support included practical governance and operations support for cross-network coordination. Examples described include managing cross-network coordinating bodies such as the steering committee, aligning schedules and deliverables across multiple partners, and keeping multi-site activities organized and progressing on time.

6) What did "centralized data management" mean for the CDMCC?

Centralized data management positioned the CDMCC as the central hub responsible for making CHARN's data efforts consistent, high-quality, and usable for Comparative Effectiveness Research. The intent was for the network to produce reliable, comparable datasets suitable for multi-site research in real-world safety net provider environments.

7) What kind of technical assistance in study design and analytics was expected?

The CDMCC was expected to help Research Nodes design studies that were feasible in real-world safety net clinical settings and support appropriate analytic strategies so that findings would be credible and comparable across sites. This included technical assistance related to study design, data infrastructure, and analytic methods.

8) What expertise was the CDMCC expected to bring?

The announcement emphasized the need for strong leadership and hands-on expertise spanning:

• Biostatistics
• Developmental study design
• Data management
• Data analysis
• Clinical data review
• Project management

9) Was the CDMCC expected to provide hands-on operational support or only high-level guidance?

The expectation was active, operational support, not just high-level guidance. The description implies day-to-day, practical contributions such as staff and site training and implementing quality assurance procedures across participating organizations.

10) What types of data standardization and quality activities were implied for the CDMCC?

Based on the description, the CDMCC responsibilities implied activities such as developing or advising on common data elements, establishing data submission and validation processes, maintaining documentation and metadata standards, supporting analytic plans, and implementing review workflows to ensure clinical data quality.

11) Why were training and quality assurance (QA) emphasized?

Training and QA were emphasized to ensure that data and procedures were applied consistently across multiple participating organizations. Consistency was important so the network could generate reliable, comparable datasets and credible multi-site CER findings across safety net settings.

12) How many awards did HRSA anticipate making under HRSA-10-206?

HRSA anticipated making one award to create a single Central Data Management Coordinating Center (CDMCC).

13) What was the estimated total funding level for the award?

The estimated total funding level was $2,000,000.

14) Was cost sharing or matching required?

No. The opportunity stated there was no cost sharing or matching requirement.

15) What type of funding instrument was used?

The instrument type was a cooperative agreement. This typically signals substantial programmatic involvement by the federal agency compared with a standard grant, which aligns with the opportunity's focus on network-building and cross-site coordination.

16) Who was eligible to apply?

Eligibility was limited to academic research centers. The posting also referenced "Others" and directed applicants to additional eligibility text for clarification, but the stated limitation highlighted academic research centers as the eligible applicant type.

17) Why did the opportunity focus eligibility on academic research centers?

The description reflects an expectation that the CDMCC would require deep technical infrastructure, research operations capacity, and methodological expertise commonly housed in academic or academically affiliated research organizations.

18) What were the key dates for this opportunity?

• Posted date: March 5, 2010
• Original closing date: June 7, 2010
• Current closing date: June 9, 2010
• Archive date: August 8, 2010

19) Where could applicants find the full announcement?

HRSA provided a link to the full announcement in the opportunity record. Applicants were directed to use that link to access the complete details.

20) Who could applicants contact for help accessing the announcement?

Applicants needing assistance accessing the announcement were directed to the HRSA Call Center at CallCenter@HRSA.GOV, along with the published phone contact options referenced in the opportunity record.

21) What research setting was this opportunity designed to support?

The opportunity was designed to support Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) rooted in safety net settings, specifically involving safety net providers organized through health center-led Research Nodes partnered with academic institutions.

22) What was the CDMCC's relationship to the four Research Nodes?

The CDMCC was intended to coordinate and connect the four separately funded Research Nodes by providing administrative coordination, centralized data management, and technical/methods support so the network could operate as a unified, multi-site research enterprise.

23) What kinds of cross-network coordinating bodies were mentioned?

The opportunity description specifically mentioned managing cross-network coordinating bodies like the steering committee as part of the administrative coordination responsibilities.

24) What is meant by making findings "credible and comparable across sites"?

In the context provided, this refers to supporting appropriate analytic strategies and consistent data standards so that results from multiple safety net sites can be interpreted together, rather than reflecting incompatible methods or uneven data quality across locations.

25) Is this opportunity still open?

Based on the dates provided, the opportunity has closed and was archived (archive date: August 8, 2010).