2014 Call for Applications
Summary of Changes for 2014
The content of the 2014 TRDRP Call for Applications remains largely unchanged from the previous year except for key changes to the deadlines and several added requirements. Award mechanisms as well as direct cost caps remain the same, as do the research priorities. Nonetheless, we strongly encourage you to review this document carefully before submitting an application. It is important to familiarize yourself with the program’s research priorities and ensure that your application adheres to the intent of the specific award mechanism. For example, Research Project Award applications must be fully developed, scientifically rigorous and include substantial as well as promising preliminary data rather than being primarily exploratory in nature. The latter type projects should be submitted as Exploratory/Developmental Award applications.
Changes to Deadlines
The deadlines for submission of Letters of Intent (LOI) and applications have changed. All applications, with the exception of training awards (Postdoctoral and Dissertation Awards) are due and will be awarded later in the year. All training award applications are due and will be awarded earlier than this previous year. The following table lists, important dates and deadlines:
*Except Conference Support and Cornelius Hopper Diversity Supplement Awards
Grant Budget Changes
California Cancer Research Fund
The California Department of Education’s research priorities for the School-Academic Research Awards have been updated (see Research Priority 4).
Training in Community/ School Based Participatory Research for CARA/SARA Applicants
Training is recommended, but not required to submit an application and is scheduled for February 13, 2014. Read below under the CARA/SARA mechanism.
The purpose of this TRDRP Call for Applications is to stimulate research on tobacco control and tobacco-related disease that is of highest priority and potential benefit to the State of California and the nation as a whole. The program anticipates that this will be achieved by supporting research that will inform and strengthen tobacco control efforts at the local, state and national levels; lead to the early detection and secondary prevention of tobacco-related diseases; and advance the prevention and cessation of nicotine and tobacco products, particularly among the most heavily affected of California’s diverse populations.
From Tobacco to Nicotine
The science and practice of tobacco control is a dynamic, rapidly evolving, and radically different field from that of just a few years ago. Last year we trumpeted the announcement by Philip Morris International at its shareholder meeting June of 2012 that they planned to introduce a low-risk cigarette by 2017. The industry is evolving so rapidly that neither Altria nor Reynolds could delay until 2017; both launched their own e-cigarette products, Mark Ten and Vuse Solo, respectively, this year. Louis Camilleri, PMI’s Chief Executive Officer words of last year are even more prophetic: “We are on the eve of what we all believe could be a paradigm shift for our industry, [these new products have] “the very real potential to not only be a game-changer, but also be the key to unlock several hitherto virgin territories, most notably the huge Chinese market.” Indeed, tobacco may be an artifact of the 20th century; nicotine addiction in the 21st century will increasingly be through a host of new products, including orbs, sticks, lozenges, inhalers and e-cigarettes. Indeed, some securities analysts are predicting that e-cigarettes will surpass conventional cigarettes by 2023.1
The Affordable Care Act
Another new development affecting the field is the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The ACA new rules on preventative care will add over 30 million new people to the health care roles and will support providing counseling and smoking cessation services to most. However, people on Medicaid who are not pregnant are not guaranteed coverage of cessation treatments. Hence, it will fall to the States to guarantee this potential benefit. What will California do; will the ACA actually expand cessation services; will the ACA save Californian lives and health care cost? These questions among others are new and important research questions that we are confronting in the new tobacco control landscape.
The Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) authority to regulate tobacco products, while not new, is just a few years old and it (the FDA) is still determining its limits and extent of its authority. Following the TPSAC Menthol Report, the FDA has spent the past year doing its own investigation of menthol; one might argue that no other substance has been scrutinized so widely. But, as the issue of menthol languishes, the FDA is taking the first tentative steps to regulate cigars, including small cigars and cigarillos. This latter move could have a tremendous impact on urban inner city youth of color, many of whom use small cigars. Menthol is only one of the thorny issues on the FDA’s plate. The regulation of e-cigarettes, the establishment of graphic warning labels and the regulation of harm reduction products are all major issues confronting the FDA; research is sorely needed in all these areas.
Tobacco Industry Influence
One thing that hasn’t changed in the tobacco control and tobacco research landscape is the influence of the tobacco industry. The industry has been successful in blocking the placement of graphic warning labels on cigarette packages. And most ominous, the industry’s influence over trans-Pacific and trans-Atlantic trade agreements does not bode well for domestic tobacco control. The sting from the defeat of of Proposition 29, which would have raised taxes on tobacco products by $1 dollar is still palpable. The tobacco industry invested over $50 million dollars into the defeat of Proposition 29, the California Cancer Research Act, in an attempt to ensure that California remains the largest consumer of tobacco products in the United States. Since 1988, California has dropped from 1st to 33rd in the U.S. in tobacco taxes per pack and ranks only 23rd in tobacco prevention spending.2 As a result, key tobacco control indicators foreshadow significant slippage in both health and economic benefits to the State.3 Tobacco interests continue to maintain a strong presence in California policymaking through spending millions of dollars on campaign contributions and lobbying expenditures.4 The industry also continues to recruit and retain smokers through price manipulation, artificially lowering the price of cigarettes and particularly targeting price-sensitive groups like youth and low-income individuals. Once the nation’s leader in protecting workers from the toxic effects of secondhand smoke, California has fallen behind the national standard set by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). California is not considered a 100% smoke-free state by the CDC. Meanwhile, 24 other states and the District of Columbia provide greater secondhand smoke protection in the workplace than California.5 The current status of tobacco control within the State challenges TRDRP to focus its limited resources in areas that will result in the evidence to develop, implement, and enforce the public policies and programs necessary to halt and reverse such trends. It calls for an intensified effort across a range of scientific disciplines focused on informing a new generation of California public policies and tobacco control initiatives.
Early Disease Diagnosis
As with the science and practice of tobacco control, the science of tobacco-related disease is also undergoing fundamental changes. Biomedical research has been and will continue to be a cornerstone of TRDRP’s mission and portfolio. The program has recently shifted its focus to the early detection and secondary prevention of tobacco-related disease.
One example is lung cancer which, given its strong association with smoking and high mortality when diagnosed in its later stages, remains an area of particular interest to the TRDRP. Over 160,000 people in the US will die of lung cancer in 2012.6 Most are still diagnosed late in disease progression – as a result the current 5-year overall survival rate is only 16%.7 Computerized tomography (CT) screening offers hope for detecting lung cancer early enough to improve lung cancer prognosis at least in high-risk patients. After years of uncertainty and controversy the results are in: low-dose computerized tomography (CT) screening saves lives. A 20% reduction in mortality has been observed when smokers at high risk of lung cancer were diagnosed using CT as compared to those who underwent chest X-ray.8 Medical professionals now recommend that current or former smokers at high risk of lung cancer undergo routine CT screening. The American College of Chest Physicians, and the American Society of Clinical Oncology for example recommend that CT screening be offered to current and former smokers aged 55 to 74 who have smoked for 30 pack years or more and either are still smoking or have quit in the past 15 years. The American Association for Thoracic Surgery guidelines extend that age range to 79 years and furthermore recommend that long-term lung cancer survivors be screened to detect second primary lung cancer9 while the National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends screening starting at age 50 with no upper limit to the age range.10
These recommendations, while a tremendous diagnostic advance, beg the question of how to diagnose lung cancer in never smokers, those who stopped smoking more than 15 years prior to diagnosis or smokers who have not accumulated more than 30 pack years. Furthermore, as with any medical procedure, CT carries its own risks including a high probability of a false positive diagnosis which in turn may lead to unnecessary and potentially injurious follow-up.11 Damage from repeated radiation exposure is also a concern. Given the risks associated with CT screening, a non-invasive test or imaging technology using molecular biomarkers to either selectively target those patients most at risk or to confirm CT screening results and reduce the number of false positives is one area of interest to the TRDRP.
Disproportionately Affected Populations
While significant advances in the science and practice of tobacco control have been evident over the past 20 years, it is also clear that certain populations, including the mentally ill, military personnel, specific ethnic and racial groups, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals, and those in the lowest socioeconomic strata, continue to bear a disproportionate burden of tobacco-related illness and death.12, 13 California is composed of a sizable majority of these populations, including the largest “minority” population in the United States (57% of the state population) and an estimated 1,079,000 lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals (2.96% of the population).14 Despite the significance of health disparities within tobacco control and tobacco-related disease, a greater understanding of societal, cultural and behavioral factors driving these differences is still needed.15 TRDRP is committed to prioritizing and supporting the scientific investigation needed to identify optimal strategies to address health inequities and to understand how to interrupt increasing disparities among certain populations. With this Call for Applications, TRDRP encourages a concerted effort by scientists, health professionals, policymakers, and community activists across the state towards eliminating tobacco-related health disparities.
Our research priorities for 2014 are an elaboration and particularization of our first strategic goal, “to fund high priority areas of research.” Consequently, all research applications submitted in response to this Call must be responsive to at least one of the following five research priorities:
Research Priority 1: Advance policies to reduce environmental exposure to the toxic effects of tobacco smoke, tobacco smoke residue, cigarette butts, and other tobacco products.
Cigarette Butt Pollution- Cigarettes and butts are the leading littered item on US roadways. 360 billion cigarettes were consumed in the US alone in 2007. Over 1 million cigarettes and filters, 16,000 lighters, 73,000 cigar tips and almost 37,000 tobacco packages or wrappers were removed from US waterways in 2010. Ingested cigarettes are poisonous to children and adults as well as animals and butt leachates are toxic to marine life. Over $5.6 million is spent annually to clean up tobacco litter in San Francisco. The impact on the environment and the risks to human health of this material are unknown and largely unexplored.
For example, research is needed on:
Third hand Smoke - “THS consists of residual tobacco smoke pollutants that remain on surfaces and in dust after tobacco has been smoked; or are re-emitted back into the gas phase; or react with oxidants and other compounds in the environment to yield secondary pollutants”.16 Toxic compounds so far identified in THS include many that are also present in SHS and mainstream smoke, as well as novel tobacco-specific nitrosamines. If and how involuntary inhalation or dermal uptake of THS affects human health is unknown. Research on third hand smoke has just begun; there are still many unknowns and numerous research opportunities.
For example, research is needed on:
TRDRP currently funds a California consortium on thirdhand smoke research. The participating research groups under this consortium have now established an infrastructure and methodologies to prepare and analyze THS samples for exposure and toxicological studies. Applicants under this Call, who plan to pursue THS research are encouraged to design a plan that will benefit from the existing TRDRP-THS research capacity supported through the consortium.
Indoor Air - Since the inception of the TRDRP much of its funding has been devoted to secondhand smoke (SHS) measurement, exposure and health effects. SHS causes premature death and disease in children including SIDS, acute respiratory infections, ear problems, asthma exacerbations and slowed lung growth and causes immediate adverse cardiovascular effects. As a result of these efforts and others across the country, SHS was classified by the US EPA as a Class A carcinogen and the 2006 Surgeon General’s Report on the health consequences of involuntary SHS exposure concluded that there is no risk-free exposure to SHS. The only way to fully protect non-smokers from exposure to SHS is to eliminate smoking in indoor spaces. As a result laws have been passed in many states banning smoking in restaurants, bars and certain outdoor areas. However many municipalities and local businesses have been resistant to such measures. Research is needed to understand SHS exposure and health risks in multi-unit housing, health risks associated with SHS exposure in casinos and the social-behavioral, economic and legal barriers to adoption of smoking bans in these areas.
Indoor Vaping - With the emergence of e-cigarettes, the question of second hand vaping (SHV) has come to the fore. Currently, there is a paucity of research on SHV, with some studies showing low volatile organic compound compositions17 On the other hand other research shows metal concentration equal to and as high as those in conventional cigarettes18. Even without the science, laws are being proposed throughout the United States and around the world to restrict and or enable the use of e-cigarettes in the indoor environment. Currently in California there is a bill before the California Legislature to restrict e-cigarette in the same areas that regular cigarettes are restricted. Toxicological and biological exposure studies on Harmful and Potentially Harmful Constituents (HPHC) (as per FDA guidance) in context of e-cigarettes and SHV would be very timely.
For example, research is needed on:
Outdoor Air - Air pollution consists of natural and manmade (anthropogenic) gaseous and particulate components that have adverse effects on cardiovascular and respiratory health.19 One of these manmade toxic air contaminants is tobacco smoke. Exposures to tobacco smoke in outdoor environments can be significant. Nicotine concentrations in several outdoor environments such as schools, amusement parks and airports, outside of office buildings can reach levels comparable to those found in smokers’ homes.20 Air pollution is often concentrated in areas where the most vulnerable populations live – near refineries, freeways and industrial areas and tobacco smoke is no exception: retail tobacco outlets, targeted and intense tobacco advertising and under-priced tobacco products are concentrated in under-served communities and communities of color.21,22 Recent evidence has shown that secondhand smoke can react with other common airborne pollutants to form carcinogenic nitrosamines not present in freshly emitted tobacco smoke. The health impact of thirdhand smoke exposure in enclosed environments is an area of active investigation. The interaction of tobacco smoke with outdoor air pollutants and its health effects, if any, is largely unexplored.
Research is needed, for example on:
Research Priority 2: Advance innovative research in the early diagnosis of tobacco-related diseases.
Cancer and Pulmonary Disease - Substantial resources are spent by the federal government and the commercial sector on tobacco-related disease therapeutics. Many advances have been made and TRDRP has played a key role in supporting the efforts of California researchers in this and related endeavors since its inception. The next generation of TRDRP disease research support will focus solely on early diagnosis and secondary prevention of tobacco-related cancers and pulmonary and cardiovascular disease.
Cancer presents a particularly challenging problem with respect to non-invasive molecular diagnostics. Cancer develops from the accumulations of somatic mutations that impair the normal functioning of signaling pathways involved in cell proliferation, cell death and DNA damage repair. Much is known about the pathways and genes affected and many of the more successful treatments of advanced disease have been developed based on this body of knowledge. However it is clear that, rather than curing advanced cancer, the best chance for making an impact on cancer mortality is by focusing on the early detection of disease. Most cancers take years to develop and the majority of patients who die of cancer do so because the cancer was not detected early, i.e., well before metastasis. Early detection of any cancer is a formidable endeavor but lung cancer presents a particularly complicated genomic landscape.23 Lung cancers have many more somatic mutations than most other tumors and lung tumors from smokers have 10 times the number of somatic mutations as those from non-smokers. Besides the long-recognized intratumoral heterogeneity characteristic of cancers there also exists a high degree of interpersonal heterogeneity in the genetic profiles of tumors from different patients – every patient’s tumor is different. Given the complexity of the cancer genomic landscape it is clear that precise and highly sensitive methods that can detect early lung cancers with widely variant genetic profiles must be developed if lung cancer mortality is to be reduced.
Research is needed on:
We encourage California researchers interested in this area to utilize new information, molecular data, and other resources available from NIH-funded efforts such as the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the Early Detection Research Network in their proposals to the TRDRP as we believe these will present new opportunities for the early detection of tobacco-related cancers.
Cardiovascular Disease - Tobacco smoking and SHS exposure have long been recognized as prominent risk factors for cardiovascular disease. The mechanism by which known and as-yet-unidentified toxicants in smoked and smokeless tobacco products increase the risk of CVD is still a promising area of research particularly in light of the FDA’s new responsibility to evaluate and regulate existing and emerging tobacco products.24
For example, research is needed on:
Research Priority 3: Expand the scientific basis to inform the regulation of nicotine and tobacco products at the local, state and national level.
Since the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 granted the FDA the power to require appropriate testing of and evaluation of tobacco products, many new challenges have arisen and old questions persist. Increasingly nicotine delivery systems are produced in non-tobacco forms. Whether oral nicotine delivery devices (orbs and lozenges) or vaporized nicotine (e-cigarettes), all these products require scientific scrutiny to determine both their short and long-term health impact. The FDA has asserted that these nicotine containing products can be regulated like other tobacco products under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Studies and findings about the toxicity and health effects of these products is not only essential at the federal regulatory level but will also be very useful to state and local tobacco control programs to educate consumers and inform regulatory policy.
These new research challenges take their place alongside old questions still confronting the FDA, foremost among them is what to do with menthol in tobacco products. There has been ample research linking menthol to youth initiation, especially among African Americans, Native Hawaiians, Filipinos and Puerto Ricans among others. Simply, candy flavorings promote tobacco initiation. The Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee of the FDA agrees and states in their report of 2011 that “removal of menthol cigarettes from the market place would benefit the public health.” TPSAC Menthol Report. Research in this area should be focused on the consequences of removing mentholated cigarettes from the market place.
Research to inform the regulation of e-cigarettes looms large. Should the FDA deem e-cigarettes as a drug as is proposed in the United Kingdom and the European Union? Or should the FDA classify these nicotine delivery devices as tobacco products and regulate them as such? The e-cigarette research agenda is a sprawling enterprise unto itself ranging from toxicological studies on the e-liquids and the vapors through the addictive potential and abuse liability, to effects on the de-normalization of existing tobacco products – research in all these areas and more are in play.
Research is needed on all putative modified risk products; products used to treat tobacco addiction; and e-cigarettes. Research is also needed to inform the creation of tobacco product standards and to assess consumer perceptions of tobacco product labeling and advertising. FDA’s scientific framework for regulation of tobacco products includes 1) Toxicity: constituents, formulation and product design including in vitro, in vivo and human laboratory and clinical trial analyses; 2) Pharmacological addiction potential; 3) Abuse liability, i.e., use intensity and factors affecting use intensity in humans including product appeal, consumer perception, marketing and social influences; 4) After-market prevalence of use and health outcomes; and 5) Price and availability.
For example, research is needed on:
We encourage all applicants interested in tobacco regulatory sciences to visit the Center for Tobacco Products, Food and Drug Administration Research Priorities; many of their areas of interest and concern, mirror those of the TRDRP.
Research Priority 4: Prevent and treat tobacco use and promote equity among disproportionately impacted groups. Studies on the basic neuroscience of nicotine addiction.
Tobacco related diseases are not proportionately distributed in California, with the greatest incidence and mortality falling on communities of color, the LGBT community, the poor, and persons with mental illness. African Americans and Vietnamese men have the highest lung cancer rates in the state; Latino’s have the greatest exposure to secondhand smoke while at work; Vietnamese, Koreans and American Indians have some of the highest smoking rates in the state; close to half of cigarettes sold are purchased by persons with mental illness; LGBT smoking rates are significantly higher than the general population; and persons of low socioeconomic status (SES) have low cessation rates and are at increased risk for lung cancer. Understanding how and why different sub-populations of Californians use tobacco products and whether there are discernible differences in the health consequences of their use are critical steps towards reducing tobacco-related health disparities.
With the constant migration of people from the Pacific Basin and Rim, Asian countries, South and Central America and Mexico, coupled with in-migration from other states, California presents tobacco control researchers with an extremely rich and heterogeneous population. The TRDRP encourages all investigators to capitalize on this population diversity to craft research proposals that seek to understand and mitigate tobacco related health disparities and promote equity. Geography, occupation, ethnicity, race, gender, sexual or gender orientation, culture, active duty and veteran military background, age (youth and the elderly), SES, and/or disability can define populations experiencing tobacco-related health disparities. Consistent with this priority, all investigators should focus their studies on one or more specific disproportionately impacted groups rather than generally diverse samples of participants.
Electronic cigarettes and other electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) are rapidly growing in popularity while research on the health risks, efficacy for sustained smoking cessation, dual use with traditional tobacco products, impact on youth and other vulnerable groups including the impact of ENDS marketing and advertising on social norms for tobacco use is either non-existent or in its infancy. We welcome proposals that elucidate social, behavioral, cultural, and economic correlates of ENDS.
Examples of broad research topics include:
Social and Behavioral Interventions to Treat Tobacco Dependence – Evidence based tobacco dependence treatments do not reach some groups of smokers. There has been mixed evidence on the effectiveness and cost-benefit of tailored smoking cessation interventions for priority groups compared to treatments developed for the general population. Research is needed on the effectiveness, cost-benefit, and scalability of interventions for the general population and priority groups.
Patterns of tobacco use have shifted to light and non-daily smoking yet the evidence supporting tobacco treatments are based on heavier smokers. Research is needed on appropriate interventions for light and nondaily smokers.
Provider-initiated cessation and relapse prevention advice is on the decline. Research is needed on addressing the barriers to provider-initiated tobacco interventions.
We also encourage applications with a focus on delivery of tobacco cessation treatments in non-traditional settings, which include but are not limited to prison reentry and juvenile justice related programs, employment agencies, homeless shelters, and faith-based organizations. Research on tobacco treatment delivery for priority groups in traditional settings (e.g., primary care) is still needed.
Cessation Medications: Applicants proposing to use a cessation medication with adult smokers may be able to obtain medication at no cost through a TRDRP arrangement with the pharmaceutical company. Contact Norval Hickman for details.
Youth-focused Research - Youth-focused epidemiological, prevention, and cessation research conducted inside and outside of schools are needed and applicable to all TRDRP mechanisms.
The TRDRP and California Department of Education (CDE) have identified the following research questions/topic areas as responsive to tobacco control priorities. However, applicants may also submit applications addressing other youth-focused research needs.
For example, research is needed on:
Research Priority 5: Advance the ability of communities throughout California to assess and limit the influence of the tobacco industry.
While we are still reeling from the tobacco industry’s $50 million dollar investment to defeat Proposition 29 , the industry has not stopped in its largess in Sacramento. Indeed, the tobacco industry remains a fixture in Sacramento that the The Center for Tobacco Policy & Organizing of the American Lung Association in California has documented well. Already the tobacco industry has begun mounting an effort to prevent the regulation of e-cigarettes. More broadly, research that documents how and when the tobacco industry affects state and local policies can be very helpful to tobacco control advocates. Policy research that demonstrates the health impact of smoke free policies and regulation can give local tobacco control advocates the necessary evidence for establishing smoke free multi-unit housing.
For example, research is needed on:
The following types of grants are available to pursue the above five research priorities.
Overview of Current 2013-2014 Mechanisms:
NOTE: Principal Investigators may submit more than one proposal per funding cycle; however only one grant in a given award mechanism will be awarded to any one individual.
Exploratory/Developmental Research Award (XT)
Purpose: The purpose of these grants is to gather preliminary data or demonstrate proof-of-principle. The ultimate goal of these awards is to provide the foundation for proposals for fully developed research project awards from other funding programs or TRDRP.
Maximum Award: Average annual direct costs cannot exceed $100,000. Allowable expenses include salaries, fringe benefits, supplies, equipment, and travel. Travel to scientific meetings is restricted to $2,000 per year (excluding travel to the TRDRP Conference). All applicants must budget a maximum of $500 for mandatory travel to the TRDRP Conference in the first year. Full indirect costs are allowed to non-UC institutions. Indirect costs to UC campuses are capped at 25%.
Maximum Duration: Up to 2 years.
Research Project Award (RT)
Purpose: Research Project Award applications must be fully developed, scientifically rigorous and include sound background information, hypotheses and substantial as well as promising preliminary or supporting data. Research Project applications should not be exploratory in nature and lacking in previously developed supporting data.
Maximum Award: Average annual direct costs cannot exceed $125,000. Allowable expenses include salaries, fringe benefits, supplies, equipment, and travel. Travel to scientific meetings is restricted to $2,000 per year (excluding travel to the TRDRP Conference). All applicants must budget a maximum of $500 for mandatory travel to the TRDRP Conference in the first year. Full indirect costs are allowed to non-UC institutions. Indirect costs to UC campuses are capped at 25%.
Maximum Duration: Up to 3 years
PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH AWARDS (CARA/SARA)
Purpose: The purpose of the Community Academic Research Awards (CARA) and the School Academic Research Awards (SARA) is to stimulate and support collaborations between community-based organizations/schools with academic investigators. These awards support a collaborative partnership to perform scientific research into tobacco control issues that are identified as important and meaningful to specific communities/schools in California.
TRDRP encourages applications that represent the breadth of community participatory research approaches. For example, one project may focus on developing new research methods for a particular community/school while another project could focus on tailoring scientifically-based methods to an underserved group or community not included in the literature.
The process of building trust and a working relationship among partners is part of the spirit of participatory research and should be described in the application. A strong application will describe steps towards developing and maintaining a long-term working relationship with collaborating team members and organizations/ schools. Applicants should include a plan to provide information related to the project back to the involved communities/schools.
Community is broadly defined as any group of individuals sharing a common characteristic, such as culture, language, race, ethnicity, gender, age, job classification, sexual orientation, or other shared attributes that might impact the effectiveness of tobacco control programs.
Schools can be any public elementary, middle and high schools, continuation high schools, alternative, juvenile court, community schools or direct-funded charter schools.
Supplemental Funding for pilot and full SARAs: Supplemental funding to defray school-site costs related to participating in a SARA is available for schools that are operated by a local educational agency. Local educational agencies are school districts, county offices of education or direct-funded charter schools that have a valid County-District-School Code in the California Public School Directory. Additionally, to be eligible for these contracted supplemental funds, the participating local educational agency must be certified by CDE as having met tobacco-free school district criteria on or before July 1, 2013. A list, by county, of certified local educational agencies that meet the California Health and Safety Code Tobacco Free Schools requirements can be found at:
Training in Community/ School Based Participatory Research
CARA/SARA Pilot Awards
A pilot award supports the initial phases of a CARA or SARA project, including solidifying the collaborations, identifying research questions, negotiating roles and responsibilities, and detailing the research plan and methods . An expected outcome from these awards is the building of a strong working relationship between academic and community partners, the building of trust between partners and the community served and the sharing of power and decision making, which will establish a foundation and capacity for research.
Maximum Duration: Up to 2 years
CARA/SARA Full Awards
These awards are to support fully developed CARA and SARA projects. These awards support a collaborative partnership to perform scientifically rigorous research into tobacco control issues that are identified as important and meaningful to specific communities/schools in the state. Ideas from community and academic partners should be integrated and recognizable in the application.
There must be a systematic plan developed by the collaborating team for communicating the work and/or findings back to the community. A few examples include disseminating the relationship building process or study results to community/school programs engaged in similar work or to the target community. Although it is advantageous for the researcher to have a history of involvement with the specific community or school, lack of such experience is not a disqualifying factor.
Maximum Duration: Up to 3 years
POSTDOCTORAL FELLOWSHIP AWARD (FT)
Purpose: These are awards for individuals to obtain postdoctoral research training under a designated mentor. The application must be prepared and submitted exclusively by the fellow and must outline an original research project (separate from the project of a mentor). Letters of support addressing the candidate’s training, potential, and the commitment of the mentor and the department to the candidate’s career development are essential. To be eligible, the candidate must be recognized by the applicant institution as a postdoctoral fellow no later than August 1, 2014. U.S. citizenship is not a requirement. The fellow must commit a minimum of 75 percent time to the research project.
Maximum Award: $45,000 annual direct costs per year averaged over the duration of the award. Indirect costs are capped at 8%.
Maximum Duration: Up to 3 years
DISSERTATION RESEARCH AWARDS (DT)
Maximum Award: $20,000 annual direct costs averaged over the duration of the award for stipend, supplies, and domestic travel. An additional maximum of $10,000 per year is allowed for tuition/enrollment fee remission, fringe benefits, and health insurance. No equipment purchases are allowed. Indirect costs are capped at 8%.
Maximum Duration: Up to 2 years
Support can be requested for scientific conferences to assess tobacco's impact on California populations; or to allow tobacco investigators to evaluate, in a timely manner, new and breaking trends in tobacco control or tobacco-related disease research. In order to qualify for funding, the planned activities must be directly related to one or more of TRDRP's Research Priorities. The activity must primarily take place in California, involve California investigators, and include, where applicable, discussants and speakers funded by TRDRP. Proposals may be submitted at any time and should be submitted on proposalCENTRAL. Applications for Conference Awards will go through a separate review process. The TRDRP Scientific Advisory Committee will make recommendations regarding funding. Conference grants will be limited in number, scope, cost, and duration. Please contact a TRDRP Program officer regarding the appropriateness of your proposal prior to submission.
This supplement is for the training of promising individuals who are or who want to pursue careers in the field of tobacco-related disease research or in tobacco control. Supplements may be requested only for trainees living in California and include those: (a) from socioeconomic, cultural, ethnic, racial, linguistic, and geographic backgrounds who are and/or have been underrepresented in tobacco research; or (b) pursuing a research interest focusing on cultural, societal, or educational problems as they affect underserved segments of society.
Investigators must have at least one year left on their TRDRP award to ensure the best conditions and results for prospective trainees. Therefore, the CHDAS is available only after the first year of the grant application.
Eligible Principal Investigators
The CHDAS is available to current principal investigators of:
*Individuals who are eligible for TRDRP Dissertation or Postdoctoral Fellowship Awards are encouraged to apply through those mechanisms rather than applying for Hopper Supplements.
The supplement cannot be transferred from one person to another; the award can be used only for the originally identified trainee. CHDAS trainees must live and be trained in California.
Maximum Supplement Amount: $15,000 annual direct costs. Indirect costs are allowed for the TRDRP portion in accordance with TRDRP policy.
Allowable Expenditures: Salary, fringe benefits, tuition, and enrollment fees for the trainee, domestic travel, and indirect costs, where appropriate. Award funding cannot be used for equipment.
Maximum Duration: Up to 2 years
Investigators from California not-for-profit organizations are eligible for TRDRP funding, including but not limited to colleges, universities, hospitals, laboratories, research institutions, local health departments, community-based organizations, voluntary health agencies, health maintenance organizations, and other tobacco control groups. The Principal Investigator should be designated by the sponsoring institution in accordance with its own policies and procedures.
In accordance with University of California policy, Principal Investigators who are University employees and who receive any part of their salary through the University must submit grant proposals through their UC campus contracts and grants office (see “Policy on the Requirement to Submit Proposals and to Receive Award for Grants and Contracts through the University,” University of California Office of the President, December 15, 1994). Exceptions must be approved by the UC campus where the Principal Investigator is employed. US citizenship is not a requirement for eligibility.
Submission of a Letter of Intent (LOI) is required to apply for all research awards except for Special Projects and Cornelius Hopper Diversity Award Supplements. You will have access to the application web pages when the LOI is approved in proposalCENTRAL, at which time you will receive a notification e-mail. To be accepted for a full application a Letter of Intent (LOI) must address one or more of TRDRP’s five research priorities.
LOIs and proposals must be submitted using the online system, proposalCENTRAL at https://proposalCENTRAL.altum.com/. To submit an LOI:
*Except Conference Support and Cornelius Hopper Diversity Supplement Awards
Questions regarding scientific issues or TRDRP policies should be directed to the appropriate TRDRP Program Officer:
Environmental Science/Public Health & Policy/Neuroscience:
Social Behavioral Sciences/Participatory Research
Biomedical and Environmental Sciences
Inquiries regarding application forms and instructions may be directed to the
Research Grants Program Office (RGPO): RGPOGrants@ucop.edu or (510) 987-9386