Votes: , R min Drama, Thriller. Thirty years later, the secrets the Agents share come back to haunt them. When his mentor is taken captive by a disgraced Arab sheik, a killer-for-hire is forced into action. His mission: kill three members of Britain's elite Special Air Service responsible for the death of his sons.
R min Action, Drama, History. After the Black September capture and massacre of Israeli athletes at the Olympics, five men are chosen to eliminate the people responsible for that fateful day. R min Comedy, Drama, Thriller. PG min Drama, Thriller. Votes: 74, R min Drama, Mystery, Sci-Fi. In the midst of the Gulf War, soldiers are kidnapped and brainwashed for sinister purposes. R min Crime, Mystery, Thriller.
A bookish CIA researcher in Manhattan finds all his co-workers dead, and must outwit those responsible until he figures out who he can really trust.
South Korean agents Ryu and Lee are tracking a female assassin from North Korea who has mysteriously disappeared. With new killings and the theft of a deadly bomb, time is running out to catch her. R min Action, Drama, Thriller. A CIA agent on the ground in Jordan hunts down a powerful terrorist leader while being caught between the unclear intentions of his American supervisors and Jordan Intelligence. James Bond descends into mystery as he tries to stop a mysterious organisation from eliminating a country's most valuable resource.
R min Crime, Thriller. After the shocking murder of his older brother, a New York history student finds himself inexplicably hounded by shadowy government agents on the trail of a Nazi war criminal who is trying to retrieve smuggled diamonds. Not Rated min Drama, Thriller. Votes: 16, R min Romance, Thriller, War.
A ruthless German spy, trying to get out of Britain with vital information about D-Day, must spend time with a young woman and her crippled husband. Approved 86 min Crime, Mystery, Thriller. A man in London tries to help a counter-espionage Agent. But when the Agent is killed, and the man stands accused, he must go on the run to save himself and stop a spy ring which is trying to steal top secret information.
Votes: 55, Not Rated 96 min Mystery, Thriller. While travelling in continental Europe, a rich young playgirl realizes that an elderly lady seems to have disappeared from the train.
Votes: 50, Passed min Thriller, War. Votes: 25, Passed min Action, Romance, Thriller. A French Intelligence Agent becomes embroiled in the Cold War politics first with uncovering the events leading up to the Cuban Missile Crisis, and then back to France to break up an international Russian spy ring.
Votes: 1, TV min Drama, Mystery, Thriller. Votes: 8, Passed 80 min Crime, Film-Noir, Thriller. A pickpocket unwittingly lifts a message destined for enemy agents and becomes a target for a Communist spy ring. Votes: 14, R 96 min Comedy, Crime, Drama. A disk containing mysterious information from a CIA agent ends up in the hands of two unscrupulous and daft gym employees who attempt to sell it.
A politically charged epic about the state of the oil industry in the hands of those personally involved in and affected by it. Following the suicide of his wife, an Israeli intelligence agent is assigned to befriend the grandchildren of a Nazi war criminal.
R min Biography, Comedy, Crime. An adaptation of the cult memoir of game show impresario Chuck Barris Sam Rockwell , in which he purports to have been a C. Years after a friend and fellow 00 agent is killed on a joint mission, a Russian crime syndicate steals a secret space-based weapons program known as "GoldenEye" and James Bond has to stop them from using it. Sign In. Copy from this list Export Report this list. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for NIH support.
Applicants who are not sure about their eligibility are strongly recommended to contact the Program Officers listed below to discuss their situation prior to submission. Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct. The NIH will not accept duplicate or highly overlapping applications under review at the same time, per 2.
This means that the NIH will not accept:. See your administrative office for instructions if you plan to use an institutional system-to-system solution. Letter of Intent. Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information that it contains allows IC staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan the review.
By the date listed in Part 1. Overview Information , prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes the following information:. George J. Papanicolaou, Ph. Applicants must propose to use data sets from at least two Common Fund programs i. Applicants should provide justification for why particular data sets were chosen for study.
Both primary and secondary analyses of Common Fund data sets may be proposed in order to develop hypotheses to address research questions. Investigators should have received access to data sets prior to the award start date. Proposed data analyses must utilize data sets from at least two Common Fund programs from the list above, and may include other NIH or other data sets, as long as the external data are currently accessible through a public controlled access database or can be shared through such a database.
For example, studies proposed may combine data within cohorts or across phenotypically different cohorts to more powerfully address research questions if the intent is to catalyze the discovery of new variants, to reveal unrealized common genetic pathways shared by related conditions, or to provide a means to generate preliminary data supporting larger projects focused on functional studies.
Applicants may enhance the value of Common Fund data sets for the research community by proposing to develop analytic methods, tools, pipelines, or workflows that can be incorporated into the data sets and used to address research questions. Applicants may also propose approaches that reflect unique and under-utilized aspects of the listed Common Fund data sets e.
All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, should include a Data Sharing Plan. The Data Sharing Plan will be evaluated during peer review to note any deficiencies, but these deficiencies shall not impact scoring. Program staff will review noted deficiencies to make sure awards are appropriate for achieving the program's goals. These details should be provided in the Data Sharing and Resource Sharing plans. In the Data and Resource Sharing Plan, applicants should describe the anticipated timeline, formats, and methods of providing the data generated or annotated -and other products used or created under this FOA to the relevant Data Coordinating Center or public repository.
Where applicable, the applicants should describe how they plan to share any tools, pipelines, or workflows used or created through open access channels e. For applications that aim to co-analyze Common Fund data with other genomic data sets that are currently accessible through an NIH approved repository e.
For applications that aim to co-analyze Common Fund data with genomic data sets that are not currently accessible through an NIH approved repository e. If the Institutional Certification is not available, provide a Provisional Certification and describe the anticipated data use limitations and associated modifiers separately. If submitting a Provisional Certification with the application, please note that a completed Institutional Certification may be required prior to award.
Note: Delayed onset does NOT apply to a study that can be described but will not start immediately i. See Part 1. Section III. Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates and times.
Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the due date to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission.
When a submission date falls on a weekend or Federal holiday , the application deadline is automatically extended to the next business day. Organizations must submit applications to Grants. NIH and Grants. Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the due date in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission. This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.
Paper applications will not be accepted. Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Eligibility Information contains information about registration. For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit How to Apply — Application Guide. If you encounter a system issue beyond your control that threatens your ability to complete the submission process on-time, you must follow the Dealing with System Issues guidance.
See more tips for avoiding common errors. Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness and compliance with application instructions by the Center for Scientific Review and responsiveness by components of participating organizations , NIH. Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in the policy. Any instructions provided here are in addition to the instructions in the policy. Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process.
The R03 small grant supports discrete, well-defined projects that realistically can be completed in two years and that require limited levels of funding. Because the research project usually is limited, an R03 grant application may not contain extensive detail or discussion.
Accordingly, reviewers should evaluate the conceptual framework and general approach to the problem. Appropriate justification for the proposed work can be provided through literature citations, data from other sources, or from investigator-generated data.
Preliminary data are not required, particularly in applications proposing pilot or feasibility studies. Awards to be made through this announcement will be limited to one year of support, so reviewers should evaluate the items below with this temporal framework in mind.
Reviewers will provide an overall impact score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field s involved, in consideration of the following review criteria and additional review criteria as applicable for the project proposed. Reviewers will consider each of the review criteria below in the determination of scientific merit and give a separate score for each.
An application does not need to be strong in all categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact. For example, a project that by its nature is not innovative may be essential to advance a field. Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is the prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project rigorous? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
If Early Stage Investigators or those in the early stages of independent careers, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field s?
Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense?
Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed? Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have the investigators included plans to address weaknesses in the rigor of prior research that serves as the key support for the proposed project?
Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility, and will particularly risky aspects be managed?
Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects? Will the project integrate data across multiple data sets and will the integration allow investigations that could not proceed without the funded integration? Will the proposed methods enable unique knowledge generation from the utilized Common Fund data sets?
Is it likely that the proposed work will generate preliminary data to form the basis for a subsequent research application? Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment, and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?
As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will evaluate the following additional items while determining scientific and technical merit, and in providing an overall impact score, but will not give separate scores for these items. For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1 risk to subjects, 2 adequacy of protection against risks, 3 potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4 importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5 data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.
For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1 the justification for the exemption, 2 human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3 sources of materials. For additional information on review of the Human Subjects section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Human Subjects.
For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Guidelines for the Review of Inclusion in Clinical Research. The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following criteria: 1 description of proposed procedures involving animals, including species, strains, ages, sex, and total number to be used; 2 justifications for the use of animals versus alternative models and for the appropriateness of the species proposed; 3 interventions to minimize discomfort, distress, pain and injury; and 4 justification for euthanasia method if NOT consistent with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals.
Reviewers will assess the use of chimpanzees as they would any other application proposing the use of vertebrate animals. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section. As applicable for the project proposed, reviewers will consider each of the following items, but will not give scores for these items, and should not consider them in providing an overall impact score.
Reviewers will assess the information provided in this section of the application, including 1 the Select Agent s to be used in the proposed research, 2 the registration status of all entities where Select Agent s will be used, 3 the procedures that will be used to monitor possession use and transfer of Select Agent s , and 4 plans for appropriate biosafety, biocontainment, and security of the Select Agent s.
Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research. Applications will be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate Scientific Review Group s convened by the Center for Scientific Review, in accordance with NIH peer review policy and procedures , using the stated review criteria.
As part of the scientific peer review, all applications will receive a written critique. Applications may undergo a selection process in which only those applications deemed to have the highest scientific and technical merit generally the top half of applications under review will be discussed and assigned an overall impact score.
Appeals of initial peer review will not be accepted for applications submitted in response to this FOA. Applications will compete for available funds with all other recommended applications submitted in response to this FOA. Following initial peer review, recommended applications will receive a second level of review by the appropriate national Advisory Council or Board.
The following will be considered in making funding decisions:. Refer to Part 1 for dates for peer review, advisory council review, and earliest start date. A formal notification in the form of a Notice of Award NoA will be provided to the applicant organization for successful applications. The NoA signed by the grants management officer is the authorizing document and will be sent via email to the recipient's business official.
Recipients must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV. Funding Restrictions. Selection of an application for award is not an authorization to begin performance. Any costs incurred before receipt of the NoA are at the recipient's risk.
These costs may be reimbursed only to the extent considered allowable pre-award costs. This includes any recent legislation and policy applicable to awards that is highlighted on this website. To help ensure the safety of participants enrolled in NIH-funded studies, the recipient must provide NIH copies of documents related to all major changes in the status of ongoing protocols. If a recipient is successful and receives a Notice of Award, in accepting the award, the recipient agrees that any activities under the award are subject to all provisions currently in effect or implemented during the period of the award, other Department regulations and policies in effect at the time of the award, and applicable statutory provisions.
Recipients of federal financial assistance FFA from HHS must administer their programs in compliance with federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, age and, in some circumstances, religion, conscience, and sex.
This includes ensuring programs are accessible to persons with limited English proficiency. Thus, criteria in research protocols that target or exclude certain populations are warranted where nondiscriminatory justifications establish that such criteria are appropriate with respect to the health or safety of the subjects, the scientific study design, or the purpose of the research.
An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through FAPIIS and comment on any information about itself that a Federal agency previously entered and is currently in FAPIIS.
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of Transparency Act , includes a requirement for recipients of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards issued in FY or later. In accordance with the regulatory requirements provided at 45 CFR The recipient must also make semiannual disclosures regarding such proceedings.
Proceedings information will be made publicly available in the designated integrity and performance system currently FAPIIS. This is a statutory requirement under section of Public Law , as amended 41 U. As required by section of Public Law , all information posted in the designated integrity and performance system on or after April 15, , except past performance reviews required for Federal procurement contracts, will be publicly available.
We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants. Recently issued trans-NIH policy notices may affect your application submission. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement.
Department of Health and Human Services. Part 1. Overview Information. Participating Organization s. Components of Participating Organizations. Funding Opportunity Title.
Activity Code. Announcement Type. Related Notices. Companion Funding Opportunity. Number of Applications. Assistance Listing Number s. Funding Opportunity Purpose. Key Dates. Posted Date.
0コメント