Recovery Act Limited Competition Research to Address the Heterogeneity in Autism Spectrum Disorders (R01) | Apply Online

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is this funding opportunity?

This opportunity was the NIH funding announcement titled "Recovery Act Limited Competition Research to Address the Heterogeneity in Autism Spectrum Disorders (R01)" with Funding Opportunity Number RFA-MH-09-170.

What was the main goal of the FOA?

The main goal was to accelerate and expand research that explains why Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) vary widely across individuals. The focus on "heterogeneity" reflected the view that autism is not a single uniform condition and that meaningful differences in biology, development, symptoms, and response to supports or treatment may indicate multiple pathways and subtypes.

What does "heterogeneity" mean in the context of ASD for this FOA?

Within this FOA, heterogeneity referred to differences among people with ASD that could include distinct biological mechanisms, developmental courses, symptom profiles, co-occurring features, and different responses to interventions or services. The intent was to move beyond broad descriptions toward clearer, more distinct ASD profiles and subtypes.

Which agency sponsored this opportunity?

The sponsoring agency was the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

What type of grant mechanism did this FOA use?

This FOA used the NIH R01 mechanism, which is generally intended for larger, more mature research projects.

What level of project readiness was expected for applicants?

Applicants were expected to propose studies that were ready for a fuller-scale test, with preliminary data already available and basic proof of principle demonstrated. This was not positioned as a purely early brainstorming or first-pass feasibility mechanism.

What scientific areas or topics did the FOA target?

The FOA targeted multiple topic areas focused on understanding and characterizing ASD heterogeneity, including measurement development, biomarkers or other biological signatures, immune and central nervous system (CNS) interactions, genetics and genomics, environmental risk factors (including gene-environment interactions), model development (animal, cellular, computational, and systems-level approaches), treatment and intervention research tailored to different ASD profiles, and services research on how care is delivered and optimized across diverse needs.

What did the FOA mean by "measurement development"?

Measurement development referred to improving tools and methods to characterize differences within ASD more precisely. Examples mentioned included better phenotyping, standardized assessments, and methods to track change over time.

What kinds of biomarker research were encouraged?

The FOA encouraged research on biomarkers or other biological signatures that could help identify ASD subgroups, predict prognosis, or guide the selection of interventions.

How did immune and CNS interactions fit into this FOA?

Immune and central nervous system interactions were a named emphasis area, reflecting interest in how immune functioning might relate to neurodevelopment or symptom patterns for certain individuals within ASD.

What genetics and genomics research did the FOA include?

Genetics and genomics were explicitly included to support work clarifying genetic contributors to ASD variability, such as gene pathways or genomic patterns associated with specific traits or co-occurring conditions.

Did the FOA include environmental risk factors?

Yes. Environmental risk factors were a focus, including non-genetic influences that may affect ASD risk or expression, particularly where interactions with genetic susceptibility could help explain different outcomes.

What types of model development were encouraged?

The FOA encouraged model development including animal models, cellular models, computational models, and systems-level approaches intended to test hypotheses about distinct mechanisms underlying ASD subtypes.

What kinds of clinical or public health research were within scope?

On the clinical and public health side, the FOA sought treatment and intervention research aimed at tailoring or improving approaches for different ASD profiles. It also encouraged services research focused on how care is delivered, accessed, organized, and optimized across diverse populations and needs.

Was this opportunity connected to other related NIH announcements?

Yes. This R01 FOA ran in parallel with three closely related announcements covering essentially the same scientific themes but using different mechanisms: RFA-MH-09-171 for collaborative R01 projects, RFA-MH-09-172 using the R21 mechanism for exploratory or early-stage studies, and RFA-MH-09-173 using the R34 (including collaborative R34) for early phases of treatment development.

How were the coordinated announcements intended to work together?

Together, the coordinated announcements were structured to support a pipeline of ASD heterogeneity research, moving from exploratory work (R21) to early clinical development (R34) to larger, established projects (R01).

Was this a Recovery Act (ARRA) funded opportunity?

Yes. It was funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and categorized as a health-related Recovery Act funding activity.

What CFDA program was associated with this funding activity?

The CFDA number listed for this activity was 93.701, Trans-NIH Recovery Act Research Support.

What was the estimated total funding associated with the opportunity?

The estimated total funding associated with the opportunity was $57,000,000.

Was cost sharing or matching required?

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

When was the announcement posted?

The announcement was posted on March 23, 2009.

What was the application closing date?

It had a single closing date of May 12, 2009.

Is this FOA still open?

No. The announcement was archived on June 12, 2009, following the single closing date.

Who was eligible to apply?

Eligibility was broad and included many types of domestic organizations and governments, such as public and private institutions of higher education; state, county, and city/township governments; special district governments; independent school districts; tribal governments and tribal organizations (including federally recognized and other-than-federally-recognized entities); public housing authorities/Indian housing authorities; nonprofit organizations (501(c)(3) and non-501(c)(3)); for-profit organizations (including small businesses and other for-profits); and other eligible institutions such as Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions, Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities, faith-based or community-based organizations, regional organizations, U.S. territories or possessions, and eligible federal agencies.

Were for-profit organizations allowed to apply?

Yes. For-profit organizations, including small businesses and other for-profits, were listed as eligible applicants.

Were tribal governments and tribal organizations eligible?

Yes. The eligibility list included tribal governments and tribal organizations, including federally recognized and other-than-federally-recognized entities.

Were nonprofits eligible, and did they need 501(c)(3) status?

Nonprofits were eligible, including both 501(c)(3) and non-501(c)(3) organizations.

Were educational institutions specifically included?

Yes. Eligible applicants included public and private institutions of higher education as well as mission-focused institutions such as Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions, and Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities.

What was the overall intent behind funding these R01 projects?

The overall intent was to rapidly advance ASD research by funding robust, readiness-to-execute R01 studies that could clarify meaningful differences within the autism spectrum and translate that understanding into improved measurement, clearer biological and environmental models of risk and outcome, and more effective interventions and services tailored to different needs.