Limited Competition Brain Tissue Resource Center for Alcohol Research (R28) | Apply Online

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is PAR-13-011 (R28) in plain terms?

PAR-13-011 was a National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), NIH funding opportunity for a specialized research resource center rather than a typical hypothesis-driven research project. Its focus was to sustain and expand a centralized Brain Tissue Resource Center for Alcohol Research so that well-characterized human specimens related to alcohol-associated brain damage would be available to the broader research community.

Was this opportunity meant to fund new research projects or a shared resource?

It was meant to fund a shared resource center. The intent was to maintain and improve infrastructure for collecting, characterizing, storing, and distributing human postmortem brain tissues (and related resources) to qualified investigators studying alcoholism and its neurological consequences.

Why was this described as a "limited competition" FOA?

This was a limited competition because it was not broadly open to applicants proposing to create a brand-new center from scratch. NIAAA specifically encouraged an application from a center that was already supported under an existing grant for the Brain Tissue Resource Center for Alcohol Research, with the expectation of continuing and enhancing an established resource.

How many awards were expected under this FOA?

The FOA anticipated a single award (ExpectedAwards: 1), reflecting the goal of supporting one centralized brain tissue resource center.

Which NIH Institute issued this funding opportunity?

The opportunity was issued by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) within the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

What grant activity code was used for this program?

The FOA used the NIH R28 activity code and was described as a discretionary grant in the health category.

What was the central purpose of the Brain Tissue Resource Center for Alcohol Research?

The central purpose was to sustain and expand a centralized bank of high-quality, well-characterized human brain specimens related to alcohol-associated brain damage, and to make those tissues available to the broader research community to accelerate studies on alcoholism and its neurological outcomes.

What kinds of specimens was the center expected to collect and maintain?

The center was expected to develop and maintain a bank of postmortem human brain tissues from individuals with alcoholism as well as appropriate control cases. The tissues were expected to be prepared in forms commonly needed by researchers, including fresh frozen samples and formalin-fixed tissues.

Why did the FOA emphasize fresh frozen and formalin-fixed tissues?

Fresh frozen tissue is commonly used for many molecular and biochemical analyses, while formalin-fixed tissue is important for histology and pathology. Providing both formats increases the usefulness of the resource to a wide range of research approaches.

What did the FOA require regarding diagnoses and case characterization?

A key requirement was that cases have confirmed clinical and pathological diagnoses. This reflects an emphasis on rigorous characterization and quality control so that downstream research findings based on these specimens would be interpretable and reproducible.

What were the four major objectives described in the FOA?

The FOA laid out four major objectives: (1) maintain a bank of postmortem human brain tissues from alcoholism and control cases in commonly used preparations (fresh frozen and formalin-fixed) with confirmed clinical and pathological diagnoses; (2) build and promote a prospective donor program in Australia called "Using our Brains"; (3) establish an associated DNA bank derived from blood samples from the donor group; and (4) actively invite and support external research groups to apply to use the tissues.

What is the "Using our Brains" program mentioned in the FOA?

"Using our Brains" was described as a prospective donor program in Australia. The FOA emphasized building and promoting it to strengthen the pipeline of future donations, recruit donors in advance, gather relevant clinical information over time, and improve the quality and consistency of collected specimens.

Why did the FOA promote a prospective (pre-consented) donor program?

A prospective approach can reduce uncertainty around diagnoses and exposures and can improve the completeness of associated clinical histories. Those factors are often limiting in postmortem human studies, so improving them increases the scientific value of the specimens.

What was the purpose of creating a DNA bank as part of the center?

The FOA expected an associated DNA bank derived from blood samples from the donor group. Pairing brain tissue with matched DNA allows researchers to connect brain-based findings with genetic data, enabling studies that integrate neuropathology, genetics/genomics, and clinical phenotypes.

How would external researchers interact with the center under this program?

The center was expected to actively invite and support external research groups interested in alcohol-related brain damage to apply to use the tissues. This underscores that the resource was meant to function as a hub that facilitates access and encourages broad scientific utilization under appropriate governance and ethical oversight.

Was cost sharing or matching required?

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

What is the CFDA number associated with this program?

The program was associated with CFDA 93.273 (Alcohol Research Programs).

When was the FOA posted and when did it close?

The announcement was posted on October 25, 2012. The original and current closing date was January 16, 2013.

Is PAR-13-011 still an active funding opportunity?

No. It was later archived on February 16, 2013, meaning it is no longer an active solicitation, though it remains part of the NIH record.

Who was eligible to apply according to the FOA language?

Eligibility information indicated that "Other Eligible Applicants" could include faith-based or community-based organizations. It also stated that non-U.S. entities (foreign institutions) were eligible to apply, and that non-domestic components of U.S. organizations were eligible to apply.

Did the FOA allow foreign involvement or not?

The eligibility language included a nuance: it stated that non-U.S. entities (foreign institutions) were eligible to apply and that non-domestic components of U.S. organizations were eligible, while also specifying that foreign components (as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement) were not allowed. This reflects an NIH distinction about how foreign involvement is structured in an application, even when foreign institutions themselves may be eligible in some contexts.

Given the limited competition, could any eligible organization realistically apply?

The overall framing, combined with the limited-competition language, indicates the target applicant pool was narrow and tied to an existing, supported Brain Tissue Resource Center for Alcohol Research with demonstrated infrastructure and capabilities, rather than a broad pool of new applicants.

What scientific area did the resource center focus on?

The resource center focused on alcohol-related brain damage and aimed to accelerate studies on the mechanisms, pathology, and consequences of alcohol use disorders on the brain by providing access to high-quality human specimens and associated data resources.

What made this award different from a standard NIH research grant?

Instead of funding a single lab's hypothesis-driven project, the FOA aimed to support a centralized infrastructure: collecting and banking specimens, confirming diagnoses, building a prospective donor pipeline, creating a matched DNA resource, and distributing materials to qualified investigators to enable many downstream studies.