ARRA OS Recovery Act 2009 Limited Competition Enhanced State Data for Analysis and Tracking of Comparative Effectiveness Impact Improved Clinical Content and Race Ethnicity Data (R01) | Apply Online

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is this grant opportunity about?

This opportunity, issued by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) using American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) funds, was designed to strengthen statewide hospital encounter data so it can better support comparative effectiveness research and related implementation work.

What is the main goal of the funding?

The main goal was to make state-level, all-payer, hospital-based encounter-level administrative datasets more analytically useful by either (1) expanding the clinical detail available for research through linkages to additional clinical sources, or (2) improving the accuracy and validity of race and ethnicity data captured in those datasets.

Which agency issued the opportunity and what funding source was used?

The opportunity was issued by AHRQ and used ARRA (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009) funds.

What grant mechanism was used?

The announcement used the R01 infrastructure development grant mechanism.

Who was this opportunity intended for?

It targeted organizations that either maintain statewide, all-payer, hospital-based encounter-level datasets or could substantially improve those datasets at a statewide scale.

What are the two main project paths applicants could choose from?

Applicants were invited to pursue one of two paths: (1) enhancing clinical content in statewide encounter-level data through linkages to additional clinical sources, or (2) improving the reliability and validity of race and ethnicity variables in hospital-based encounter data.

What types of hospital encounters were in scope under the clinical enhancement path?

The clinical enhancement path focused on encounter-level data covering inpatient stays, emergency department visits, and ambulatory surgery.

What does "enhancing clinical content" mean in this context?

It means broadening and supplementing population-based administrative hospital encounter data by linking it to additional electronic or registry-based clinical information, with the aim of creating richer statewide data infrastructure for research and implementation evaluation.

What kinds of data sources could be linked to improve clinical detail?

Examples listed in the announcement included hospital electronic pharmacy data, electronic clinical data drawn from hospital systems, electronic pre-hospital emergency care data, clinical registries, and vital records such as birth and death certificates. The announcement also noted that acceptable enhancements were not limited to the examples provided.

Why were linkages to additional clinical sources encouraged?

The goal of linkages was to generate stronger evidence about what treatments work best for which patients (comparative effectiveness research) and to help evaluate real-world efforts to implement findings from comparative effectiveness research.

What does the race and ethnicity improvement path focus on?

This path emphasized strengthening how race and ethnicity are collected, coded, and validated in hospital-based encounter data so the resulting variables are more reliable and valid for disparities analyses and for accurately stratifying comparative effectiveness analyses across populations.

What kinds of issues was the race and ethnicity path meant to address?

It was meant to reduce misclassification and improve the trustworthiness and credibility of findings related to equity, outcomes, and access that rely on race and ethnicity data in administrative encounter datasets.

What did the announcement expect applicants to include in their design justification?

Applicants were expected to justify design choices in a practical, inventory-like way by clearly laying out which specific data elements would be incorporated, where those elements would come from, and why those elements were prioritized.

Why was this detailed justification important?

The announcement highlighted that cost and complexity can vary widely depending on which clinical elements are added and which sources are linked, so proposals needed to make the scope, priorities, and rationale clear and show readiness to carry out statewide linkage and infrastructure improvements.

Was this a discretionary grant and what category was it in?

Yes. It was described as a discretionary grant opportunity in the health category.

Was cost sharing or matching required?

No. The announcement specified that there was no cost sharing or matching requirement.

How much total funding was estimated for this opportunity?

The total estimated funding amount was $10,000,000.

What is the funding opportunity number?

The funding opportunity number was RFA-HS-10-010.

When was the opportunity posted and when did it close?

It was posted on February 19, 2010. The original and final application closing date was March 29, 2010.

Is this opportunity still active?

No. The announcement was archived on April 29, 2010.

Who was eligible to apply?

Eligible applicants included state governments; county governments; city or township governments; public and private institutions of higher education; and Native American tribal governments and organizations (including certain non-federally recognized tribal entities as described in the announcement).

Where was the full announcement hosted?

The full announcement was hosted through the NIH grants guidance system on behalf of AHRQ.

What does "statewide, all-payer" mean in the context of the targeted datasets?

Based on the announcement language, the targeted datasets were intended to cover hospital-based encounters across an entire state and across payers (rather than being limited to a single payer type), and to be maintained or improved at that statewide scale.