← Back to search

National Institutes of Health · Department of Health and Human Services

Investigator-Focused Award (Parent R35)

Opening soon

Key facts

Deadline
Opens May 27, 2027 · due about Oct 4, 2027 Estimate, not confirmed by the funder ?
Award size
Not stated: see the official notice
Match ?
Not required · Work out your budget and match
Who can apply
Tribal organization, Tribal government, Small business, School district, Private college or university, City or town government, County government, Nonprofit with 501(c)(3), State government, Larger business, Special district (utility, fire, etc.), Nonprofit without 501(c)(3), Public college or university, and others named in the official notice
Where
Anywhere in the U.S., including Tennessee

Opening soon: the funder has announced this grant, but you can't apply yet. Use the time to get ready and check whether it fits.

Before you apply: federal grants require an active SAM.gov registration (Unique Entity ID) and a Grants.gov account. Registration is free but can take weeks, so start now, not when the deadline is close. Get-ready checklist

How this fits you

  • Available in Blount County (nationwide program)
  • No match required
  • Past Tennessee awards on file: 1102

Tell us who you are to see whether you're eligible.

View on Grants.gov Add dates to my calendar

More from National Institutes of Health

About this grant

The National Institutes of Health intends to publish a Parent R35 "Investigator-Focused Award" Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) to fund research programs for investigators at all career stages, including Early Stage Investigators (ESIs). The Parent R35 Investigator-Focused Award is intended to provide support for an investigator's program of research within the mission of the awarding Institute or Center (IC) rather than support for a pre-defined project with specific aims. The R35 is typically expected to be an investigator's primary (or only) source of research funding from the awarding IC. An R35 award gives investigators funding stability and scientific freedom. With R35 support, researchers can pursue ambitious and innovative studies without the pressure of constantly seeking new funding streams. Key benefits include: • Providing flexibility to follow the science as it evolves within the awarding IC's mission. • Providing stability to take on important, challenging research questions. • Allowing recipients to devote sufficient time to research, mentoring, and scientific service, and less time to grant administration. • Providing a high potential for scientific breakthroughs by enabling investigators to think broadly and pursue promising opportunities.

Who can apply, from the official notice

Other Eligible ApplicantsIndian/Native American Tribal Governments (Other than Federally Recognized);Eligible Agencies of the Federal Government;U.S. Territory or Possession;Faith-based or Community-based Organizations;Regional Organizations;

Ask a partner for a letter

Writing the need statement? Blount County facts with citations.

Who in Tennessee has won this program

365 awards to Tennessee groups in 9 counties since 1975 · 0 in Blount County. Largest shown:

Past Tennessee winners
Past winnerWhereAmountFiscal year
Vanderbilt University Medical CenterNashville, Davidson County$143.7M2016
St Jude Children's Research Hospital IncMemphis, Shelby County$127.8M1997
St Jude Children's Research Hospital IncMemphis, Shelby County$81.5M1993
Meharry Medical CollegeNashville, Davidson County$66.3M spent that year2025
Vanderbilt University Medical CenterNashville, Davidson County$51.7M spent that year2025
Meharry Medical CollegeNashville, Davidson County$45.7M
St Jude Children's Research Hospital IncMemphis, Shelby County$41.4M1999
Vanderbilt University Medical CenterNashville, Davidson County$36M2003
Vanderbilt University Medical CenterNashville, Davidson County$32.8M2023
St Jude Children's Research Hospital IncMemphis, Shelby County$31.4M2003
Vanderbilt UniversityNashville$30.6M spent that year2025
Vanderbilt University Medical CenterNashville, Davidson County$27.5M1997

Source: USAspending.gov, Federal Audit Clearinghouse. Past awards show who this program funds. They don't guarantee future awards.

Tennessee groups that got this money through a state agency or another organization

This federal money also reaches local groups as pass-through grants. 737 pass-through grants on file · 0 in Blount County. Largest shown:

Tennessee pass-through grant winners
Past winnerWhereThroughAmountFiscal year
Vanderbilt University Medical CenterNashville, Davidson CountyYale Univ$3.4M2023
St Jude Children's Research Hospital IncMemphis, Shelby CountyUniversity of Southern California$2.8M2023
Vanderbilt UniversityNashville, Davidson CountyVanderbilt University Medical Center$2.6M2025
Vanderbilt UniversityNashvilleVumc$2.6M spent that year2024
Vanderbilt UniversityNashvilleVanderbilt University Medical Center$2.5M spent that year2025
Vanderbilt UniversityNashville, Davidson CountyVanderbilt University Medical Center$2.5M2023
Vanderbilt UniversityNashville, Davidson CountyVanderbilt University Medical Center$2.3M2023
Vanderbilt UniversityNashville, Davidson CountyVanderbilt University Medical Center$2.3M2023
Vanderbilt UniversityNashville, Davidson CountyVanderbilt University Medical Center$2.2M2023
Vanderbilt University Medical CenterNashville, Davidson CountyUniversity of Wisconsin System$2.2M2023
St Jude Children's Research Hospital IncMemphis, Shelby CountyWeill Medical College of Cornell University$2.1M2026
Vanderbilt UniversityNashville, Davidson CountyVanderbilt University Medical Center$2M2024

Source: USAspending.gov pass-through reports (the first recipient reports each one of $30,000 or more).

About the federal program

Environmental Health, also called “National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences”
Program number 93.113 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant

How applications are judged

The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to stated program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the scientific and...

Match

None required (federal program listing).

This program on SAM.gov

About the federal program

Oral Diseases and Disorders Research, also called “Dental, Oral and Craniofacial Research.”
Program number 93.121 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Cooperative agreement (a grant with close agency involvement), project grant

How applications are judged

The primary criteria for evaluating grant applications include assessment of: (1) the scientific merit, significance and overall impact of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the competency of the proposed investigator(s) to successfully pursue the project; (3) the innovation and novelty of the concepts, approaches, or methodologies; (4) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (5) the adequacy of the available proposed facilities and resources; (6) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (7) the relevance and importance to the posted institute program objectives. Also evaluated, where applicable, but not scored are: (1) protections for human subjects; (2) inclusion of women, minorities, and children; (3) vertebrate animal welfare; and (4) adequate protection of research personnel and/or the environment, biosafety, biocontainment and the security of select agents; (5) resource sharing plans; (6) authentication of key biological and/or chemical resources, (7) budget and period of support. In addition, the following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: the potential of the proposed research for commercial application. Phase II grant applications will reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the scientific and technical merit of...

Match

None required (federal program listing).

This program on SAM.gov

About the federal program

Human Genome Research, also called “National Human Genome Research Institute”
Program number 93.172 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant

How applications are judged

In each year's official notice: read this year's.

Match

None required (federal program listing).

Examples of funded projects

Fiscal year 2025: Examples of research supported by NHGRI in FY 2025 include characterization of genes, sequencing, databases, and projects on the following list: https://reporter.nih.gov/search/KP6XtPborUWv7kYNeFlJSA/projects?shared=true Fiscal year 2026: Current projects supported by NHGRI include basic genomic science; functional and clinical variation; genomic medicine; technology development; computational genomics and data science; training programs; conferences; databases; determining the ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of biomedical and behavioral research; as well as projects on the following list: https://reporter.nih.gov/search/PbojAWqEZ0aySDrGRZXHTg/projects?shared=true

This program on SAM.gov

About the federal program

Minority Health and Health Disparities Research
Program number 93.307 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant

How applications are judged

The major elements in evaluating all new grant and renewal grant applications include assessments of the scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; and the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project and the relevance and importance to the announced program objectives. SBIR and STTR grants: For Phase I grant applications, the criteria used are the soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; the technological innovation of the proposed research; the potential of the proposed suitability of the facilities and research environment; and where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for safeguarding human or animal subjects and/or protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. For Phase II grant applications, the criteria used are the degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; the scientific and technical merit of the proposed approach for achieving the Phase II objectives; the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff and consultants; the technological...

Match

None required (federal program listing).

This program on SAM.gov

About the federal program

Trans-NIH Research Support, also called “NIH-wide Research Support”
Program number 93.310 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant, training

How applications are judged

Funding decisions are based on scientific merit (42 CFR 52h) and program relevance. Scientific merit review encompasses: the peer review criteria detailed in the specific funding announcement, as well as the significance, approach, and innovation of the proposed research; the competency of the principal investigator; the adequacy of the resources and environment; the proposed budget and requested period of support; and, where applicable, the adequacy of the measures for protecting against adverse effects upon humans, animals, or the environment.

Match

None required (federal program listing).

This program on SAM.gov

About the federal program

Cancer Cause and Prevention Research
Program number 93.393 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Cooperative agreement (a grant with close agency involvement), project grant

How applications are judged

The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; 2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the scientific...

Match

None required (federal program listing).

This program on SAM.gov

About the federal program

Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research
Program number 93.394 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Cooperative agreement (a grant with close agency involvement), project grant

How applications are judged

The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; 2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the scientific...

Match

None required (federal program listing).

This program on SAM.gov

About the federal program

Cancer Treatment Research
Program number 93.395 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Cooperative agreement (a grant with close agency involvement), project grant

How applications are judged

The major elements in evaluating applications include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the...

Match

None required (federal program listing).

This program on SAM.gov

About the federal program

Cancer Biology Research
Program number 93.396 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Cooperative agreement (a grant with close agency involvement), project grant

How applications are judged

The major elements in evaluating applications include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following will be considered in making funding decisions: 1) Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as determined by scientific peer review; 2) Availability of funds; and 3) Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.

Match

None required (federal program listing).

This program on SAM.gov

About the federal program

Cancer Centers Support Grants, also called “Cancer Centers”
Program number 93.397 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Cooperative agreement (a grant with close agency involvement), project grant

How applications are judged

The major elements in evaluating applications include the following: (1) An adequate base of established programs of high quality in laboratory and clinical cancer research; (2) research activity in a variety of disciplines, and evidence of high degree of interdisciplinary coordination, interaction and cooperation among center members; (3) appropriate and adequate organization and facilities for the conduct and evaluation of center activities; (4) a qualified director with adequate authority; and (5) an adequate commitment of the parent institution or institutions to the cancer center. The center should be recognized as a major element within the organizational structure.

Match

None required (federal program listing).

This program on SAM.gov

About the federal program

Cancer Research Manpower, also called “Cancer Manpower Grants”
Program number 93.398 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant

How applications are judged

The major elements in evaluating proposals include the assessment of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives.

Match

None required (federal program listing).

This program on SAM.gov

About the federal program

Cancer Control, also called “Cancer Control Grants”
Program number 93.399 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant

How applications are judged

The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives.

Match

None required (federal program listing).

This program on SAM.gov

About the federal program

Vision Research - Research Projects
Program number 93.543 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Grant

How applications are judged

The following consideration will be used in determining projects to be funded: (1) Technical merit of the proposed project; (2) Availability of funds; and (3) Relevance to program priorities.

Match

None required (federal program listing).

This program on SAM.gov

About the federal program

Biomedical Research and Research Training
Program number 93.859 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant

How applications are judged

All accepted applications are reviewed for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate initial review group and by a national advisory council. The goal of NIGMS funding policies is to maximize the scientific impact of investments in investigator-initiated biomedical research to drive fundamental scientific discoveries that advance understanding of human health and disease. To address this goal, the Institute strives to support a broad portfolio of research grants of high scientific and technical merit, as determined by peer review, in its mission areas. However, in deciding to fund any application, NIGMS staff also considers other factors, including (consistent with applicable law): the breadth of the Institute�s research portfolio; approaches, and investigators; the total amount of funding available to the investigator; the priority of the research area for the Institute�s mission; Early-stage investigator status; At-risk investigator status?;? and whether the PI would have more than one NIGMS funded R01 (including multi-PI R01s). Because these factors are considered, NIGMS does not have a �payline� or strict cutoff in scores that it will fund. It is important to understand that even applications with outstanding scores might not be funded if the investigator already has substantial other support. Because NIGMS prioritizes funding for meritorious investigators who otherwise would not have support over providing additional grants to already well-funded...

Match

None required (federal program listing).

This program on SAM.gov

About the federal program

Vision Research, also called “NEI”
Program number 93.867 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant

How applications are judged

The following consideration will be used in determining projects to be funded: (1) Technical merit of the proposed project; (2) Availability of funds; and (3) Relevance to program priorities.

Match

None required (federal program listing).

This program on SAM.gov

About the federal program

Medical Library Assistance
Program number 93.879 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant

How applications are judged

Criteria for selection are specific to NOFO.

Match

None required (federal program listing).

This program on SAM.gov

Something wrong on this page? Tell us
What's wrong?