occupational health research proposal

Extramural Research Grants

To maximize the grants program’s usefulness in protecting workers, NIOSH funds projects that are both scientifically sound and related to program priorities. Prevention is the thrust of the research program, and studies are supported to identify occupational populations at risk, develop methods for measuring exposures to hazards and detecting adverse health effects, determine the prevalence and incidence of occupational hazards, understand the etiology of occupational diseases and injuries, and reduce or eliminate exposures to hazards. Support is provided for both laboratory and field studies involving humans, as well as laboratory studies with various animal models and cell lines. Acute, subchronic, and chronic investigations are supported. Methods development involves measurement instrumentation, analytical techniques, medical monitoring procedures, and statistical designs to improve accuracy and precision of results. Fundamental or basic research may be supported if the applicant describes in the proposal how the research effort has current or potential utility in dealing with an occupational safety or health concern.

The announcements listed below are published in the NIH Guide to Grants and Contracts. Each announcement specifies the research priorities of interest, the type of grant activity supported, and the information needed to submit a grant application.

Current Research Grant Opportunities

Niosh sponsored, niosh co-sponsored.

(For previous funding opportunities, see Past Funding .)

Follow NIOSH

Niosh homepage.

• Workplace Safety & Health Topics
• Publications and Products
• Contact NIOSH

Exit Notification / Disclaimer Policy

• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) cannot attest to the accuracy of a non-federal website.
• Linking to a non-federal website does not constitute an endorsement by CDC or any of its employees of the sponsors or the information and products presented on the website.
• You will be subject to the destination website's privacy policy when you follow the link.
• CDC is not responsible for Section 508 compliance (accessibility) on other federal or private website.

Research Funding

Subscribe to the funding alert newsletter.

The Duke Funding Alert newsletter, published every Monday, provides information on all new and updated grants and fellowships added to the database during the prior week. This listserv is restricted to members of the Duke community.

Request Subscription

CDC -- Occupational Safety and Health Research (R01)

The purpose of the R01 grant program is (1) to develop an understanding of the risks and conditions associated with occupational diseases and injuries, (2) to explore methods for reducing risks and preventing or minimizing exposure to hazardous conditions in the workplace, and (3) to translate significant scientific findings into prevention practices and products that will effectively reduce work-related illnesses and injuries.

The Research Project Grant (R01) supports a discrete, specified, circumscribed project in scientific areas that represent the investigators’ specific interests and competencies and that fall within the mission of NIOSH.

Applicants must concisely describe the occupational health burden addressed in their proposal and must link the need for the proposed research activities to planned outputs that will help alleviate this burden. Applicants should clearly articulate the anticipated impacts of the proposed research, both during the project period and beyond.

July 23, 2018 for New applications;

August 10, 2018 for Resubmission, Renewal, and Revision applications;

Standard dates apply for future due dates. ( Feb. 5, Jun. 5, Oct. 5)

PAR-18-812 Expiration Date: November 18, 2024 per  NOT-OH-24-004

Agency Website

Amount description.

Up to $400,000 in direct costs (including Consortium F&A costs) per Budget Period.

Up to $1.6M in direct costs (including Consortium F&A costs) for a 4-year period of performance.

No more than $400,000 in direct costs may be requested in any single year.

Funding Type

Eligibility, external deadline.

Occupational Therapy : Research Proposal

• Research Proposal
• Discovery@RML
• E-Journals This link opens in a new window

Credit: IJRTOnline

Helpful handouts.

• Literature Review How-To
• Literature Review - Annotated Example
• Literature Search Tracking Log
• Literature Review Tracking Log
• Qualitative Data Collection
• Quantitative Data Collection
• Introduction
• Literature Review
• Research Design
• Methodology

The Introduction section of the research proposal should provide the reader with an overview of your research.  You want to take the time to briefly explain why you selected your topic and why it is important to your field.  You will then want to express what your research adds to the field and why it is important.  It is helpful for the reader and yourself to use the section to define terms and/or concepts that will be important to your proposal and overall research. The introduction should conclude with your research question(s) or hypothesis(es) and what you aim to learn or achieve by completing this research. Many find it helpful to make the Introduction the last section that they complete.  By doing this, you will have a clearer understanding of your overall research strategy and research question.  

Your introduction should do the following:, explain the problem being investigated and related issues, explain the purpose of investigating the problem, provide relevant background or historical information , explain research trends and relevant theories for the field, define key terms and theories , set parameters and aims for the study, state the proposals research question(s) or hypothesis(es), the literature review section of your research proposal is where you present an analysis of the published literature on your research topic.  the literature review does not need to cover every published paper or book but should survey scholarly literature that is the most important research within your field and on your particular topic.  the goal of the literature review is to analyze the available body of literature and to present how it is related, either through theory, method, or concepts.  you want to show the reader that your research fits any gaps present within the field, therefore making your research new and valuable to the field. , organize your results. , utilize literature review trackers , save all your journal articles to one place , keep track of databases searched and terms used. , group findings., you want to find similarities and differences in the literature. , try grouping by methods, concepts, theories, or findings., look for controversy., is there a debate within your field of study , are some researchers using one theory over another, find the gaps. , you want to find the gaps in the literature to help show that your research is new and important to the field. , do not summarize. , you want to ensure that you are analyzing the literature in your review, don't just summarize each study. .

The Research Design section of your research proposal is where you will explain your research plan and the process and procedures that will go into carrying out your plan. 

You should explain the type of research you will be performing: qualitative, quantitative, mixed-methods, etc. this determination will impact all other components of your research plan from population to data analysis (pickard, 2013, 52-53)., this section should answer the following questions:, is your study qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods, why have you made this decision, why is this the most appropriate study design, qualitative.

Quantitative 

The methodology section is where you describe exactly how you anticipate carrying out your research.  this section will include detailed explanations of your research methods, data collection, and data analysis (pickard, 2013, 53). , you should be answering the following questions:, what research method(s) are you applying to the study, why have you made this choice, how do you intend to structure the method(s) for your investigation, population , you will first need to determine who will constitute your research population, i.e. who are you studying are you planning on studying a large group of people, or a small group.  this decision will be in part be determined by your research design and methods. , "your research population is the entire set of individuals about which inference will be made." (pickard, 2013, 60). , sampling methods are used when you cannot include everyone in your research population, and therefore there is a need to create a pre-defined 'sample' of your population. within this section, you will need to explain how you plan on obtaining your sample and why this sampling method is the most appropriate and generalizable. , "sampling is the process of selecting a few from many in order to carry out empirical research." (pickard, 2013, 59). , types of sampling techniques:, probability sampling, simple random sampling, stratified random sampling, cluster sampling, quota sampling, purposive sampling, a priori criteria sampling, snowball sampling, data collection, within this section, you will need to explain who you plan to obtain your research data and what type of data you plan on collecting.  will you be performing an experiment with data points, an interview with questions, or will you be utilizing a research instrument the research design and type of data will determine your data collection procedures.  remember that data collection techniques are tied with data analysis, the type of procedure for data collection must match how your data will be analyzed. , examples of data collection techniques:, empirical , research instruments, questionnaires, reliability: measures consistency, validity: does it measure what it's supposed to measure, observations, focus groups , data analysis, in this section, you will need to explain how you plan to analyze the data you collected.  the type of data analysis is based upon the type of data collected and your research design.  you will need to determine if your research is quantitative or qualitative, this will impact how you will analyze your data.  quantitative data analysis involves statistical calculations and procedures, while qualitative does not. , quantitative analysis, frequency distribution, mann-whitney u test, rank order correlation, all parametric statistics, qualitative analysis, comprehending, synthesizing, re-contextualizing, the research ethics section is where you describe how you plan to uphold ethical considerations.  all research involving human or animal participants need to abide by ethical standards. the types of ethical considerations and standards you must consider for your research plan will depend on the type of research design, population, sample, and data collected.  , you must show you understand and acknowledge the ethical boundaries placed on your research plan. , the irb or institutional review board is a type of committee that applies research ethics by reviewing the methods proposed for research to ensure they are ethical. , federal regulations involving human subjects must be reviewed by an irb.  the irb must approve or determine the project to be exempt prior to the start of any research activities. , you must submit your research for irb approval if it meets the following criteria:, you are utilizing human participants, your data collection is systematic and methodical, the goal of your research is to contribute to the generalizable scientific knowledge base of your discipline, informed consent , you will need to obtain informed consent from your study participants.  informed consent is a document that study participants agree to sign acknowledging that they understand what they are agreeing to, what is being asked of them, the purpose of the research, how their information will be used and/or protected, and are aware of any danger to their body or mind. informed consent creates a mutual understanding between researchers and study participants., data ethics, anonymity : the study participants remain totally anonymous during and after the research activity., confidentiality : the identity of the participants will not be revealed when using any data provided by that participant..

References:

Pickard, A.J. (2013).  Research Methods in Information  (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: ALA Neal-Schuman.

Revised with permission:  Research Process and Scholarship Guide , National University Library

• << Previous: Research
• Next: Databases >>
• Last Updated: Feb 28, 2024 1:20 PM
• URL: https://umc.libguides.com/OT

• About MCOHS
• Advisory Council
• Faculty and Staff
• Resources and Environment
• Our Setting
• Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology
• Occupational and Environmental Health Nursing
• Occupational and Environmental Medicine
• Occupational Hygiene
• Occupational Injury Prevention
• Occupational Safety
• Academic Programs
• Application
• Financial Aid
• Employment Opportunities
• OHS Careers
• Funded Pilot Projects
• Research to Practice
• Continuing Ed
• MCOHS Impact
• Upcoming Events
• NORA Symposia

Pilot Projects RFP

Mcohs-erc pilot projects research training program request for proposals.

Funding period: 7/1/2024 – 6/30/2025

APPLICATION DEADLINE: MARCH 1, 2024

Download a pdf

Grants ranging from $5,000 to a maximum of $20,000 are available to occupational health and safety (OHS) researchers in  Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wisconsin . Areas of OHS include occupational/industrial hygiene, occupational and environmental health nursing, occupational and environmental epidemiology, occupational and environmental medicine, occupational health services research and policy, injury epidemiology, safety, ergonomics, toxicology, health physics, and occupational health psychology.

The Request for Proposal (RFP) is applicable only to educational institutions  and targets (1) newly-independent principal investigators (PIs); (2) experienced PIs pursuing OHS as a new direction for research; and (3) doctoral research trainees working under the supervision of a PI. Priority will be given to:

• Research proposals with a high potential for affecting the practice of OHS;
• Projects that focus on OHS disparities and vulnerable workers;
• Research ideas that have the potential for: i) resulting in peer-reviewed publications; and ii) being developed into proposals for more substantial funding, based on results from this research grant;
• PIs working in complementary or non-traditional disciplines who wish to become more actively involved in addressing occupational safety and health issues;
• PIs attempting to develop innovative research efforts in collaboration with faculty from the MCOHS-ERC;
• Junior PIs needing initial support for innovative research areas who lack support from other sources; and
• Doctoral students undertaking research required for their degree

Research must be relevant to the occupational health and safety field and focus on the  NIOSH National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA) objectives . Potential types of projects include intervention studies, risk factor analyses, and exposure assessments affecting a broad range of employee groups, including construction workers, farmers, industrial process workers, and small business owners.

Doctoral students applying for funds must list an advisor, who must have faculty ranking at the same institution. The faculty advisor will be responsible for overseeing the expenditure of funds.

An annual/final progress report summarizing research activities and results must be received within two months of the end of the grant funding period.  As part of the final reporting, awardees are required to create a research-to-practice (r2p) product related to their project. Investigators will be expected to complete a poster and/or provide a short presentation of their project results at the annual NORA Symposium held at the MCOHS-ERC, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. As required by the funding agency, those receiving awards must agree to respond to follow-up for at least five years, regarding all presentations, publications, grants submitted and grants received, that are relevant to results of this funding.

Because we are requesting proposals from researchers who may not have traditionally engaged in research or who are in complementary or non-traditional disciplines, the project teams may not have expertise in all the required areas for their proposal. In such cases, the investigators must seek collaborators from the MCOHS-ERC faculty with the required expertise.

Pilot project funding is contingent upon continued support of MCOHS by NIOSH.

APPLICATION GUIDELINES

• Application Cover Page from PI with the following information:
• Title of project
• Funding request
• Principal Investigator(s): name, title, organization, address, email, telephone
• On your cover page, please include the following statement: This pilot project application is not currently under review by any other grant administering program. If I submit this pilot project application (or an application with similar aims) to another funder while it is under review by the MCOHS-ERC, I will notify the MCOHS-ERC. I understand that failure to comply with this policy is grounds for rejection of the application and withdrawal of any funds that may be awarded.
• Abstract: A 300 or fewer word abstract that includes a summary of the proposal.
• Proposal: A short, single-spaced proposal outlining the proposed research project using 11 point (or larger) Arial font, five page maximum for items A-E. Use 1/2″ margins and single spacing in the narrative. Required elements include:
• Objective and Specific Aims
• Significance and how the project is important to the field and Upper Midwest region.
• Innovation: what new knowledge or ideas this project will develop.
• Methods for accomplishing the research: research design, population to be studied (if applicable), data collection methods, data analysis methods and plan).
• Expected results and importance of research: including dissemination through professional presentations, peer-reviewed publications, and anticipated opportunities for future funding.
• Timetable (not included in five page maximum)
• Mentorship Plans: PhD students and postdoctoral associates should identify one or more faculty mentors at their institutions to help guide their research. Junior faculty should identify a mentor at the rank of Associate Professor or higher who can advise them on their projects. If junior faculty do not have suitable colleagues at their home institutions, they are encouraged to seek mentorship from one of the faculty members affiliated with MCOHS. (not included in five page maximum)
• References (not included in five page maximum)
• Application/Budget Form ( word ) ( pdf )

The funding period is July 1, 20243 – June 30, 2025.  Pilot project funding is contingent upon continued support of the Midwest Center for Occupational Health and Safety by NIOSH.

Eligible Expenses: If there is clear justification of the need for expenditures and a clear explanation of their direct relevance to the proposed research, these awards may be used for any category of research-related expenses, with the following limitations:

• Faculty salary support may not exceed 5% for each faculty member.
• Travel to professional meetings will not be funded with the exception of travel to the annual NORA Symposium held at the MCOHS-ERC, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, during spring to present results from the research project.
• Indirect costs capped at 8% MTDC (exclusive of tuition and equipment) .
• Budget justification: Should not exceed one page; a description of each item listed in the budget should be included with an indication of its relation to the proposed work.
• Biographical sketch: A short (no more than two pages) biographical sketch or resume for key personnel detailing qualifications to conduct research. Provide: (a) name, degrees, title, institution; (b) personal statement identifying experience/expertise that is pertinent to the proposed research; (c) positions and honors in chronological order; (d) selected peer-reviewed publications; (e) current other support (title, funding source, funding period, percentage effort on each type of support).
• Human or Animal Subjects: Statement addressing plans for use of human or animal subjects in research. IRB approval must be received prior to distribution of funds. The IRB must be registered with the DHHS Office of Human Research Protections and have completed a Federal-wide Assurance.
• Letters of Support: (a) Letter from a faculty advisor is required for all students, indicating the student’s research ability. (b) Letters of support from co-investigators and collaborators indicating their agreement to collaborate and the nature of their roles and responsibilities on the project. (c) Applications requiring data analysis should either include a statistician co-investigator on their research team or the applicant should provide a letter of support from someone qualified to conduct or give guidance on the proposed analysis.
• Compliance Form: Completed and signed Compliance and Signature Form ( word ) ( pdf )

SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

Applications will be accepted in electronic format only. The entire application should be submitted as a single PDF document in the order listed in the APPLICATION GUIDELINES section above.

Submit all application materials no later than 5:00 pm on Friday, March 1, 2024 to Dr. Peter Raynor, PhD, Professor, at [email protected] .

REVIEW PROCESS/CRITERIA

A Scientific Review Board will review all the proposals that are received for scientific and programmatic merit (according to criteria described below) and make funding recommendations. The Scientific Review Board members will be experts from academia, government, and industry who have research and professional interests in occupational health and safety. They will represent a range of professions, such as engineering, medicine, epidemiology, industrial hygiene, nursing, and safety/injury prevention. Members of the Board will include representatives from outside the University of Minnesota.

Criteria Used to Assess Awards

The following criteria will be used in determining these competitive awards:

• Research Score (50%) , including an assessment of:
• Overall scientific merit: The applicant must submit an original and feasible proposal that demonstrates the applicant’s understanding of the proposed field of research. Prior research experience is not necessary.
• Purpose: A clear statement and description of the purpose of the research project must be included.
• Specific objectives and goals: Specific aims/goals of the research project must be listed and defined.
• Methods: The methods proposed for carrying out the research must be defined and described clearly.
• Health Disparities Score (25%) , including consideration of:
• Study populations: The application addresses occupational health and safety topics relevant to workers who experience health disparities based on gender, race, ethnicity, immigration status, English-speaking ability, age, disability, and other factors that enhance vulnerability to disparities.
• Hypotheses: The hypotheses for the application indicate that results will have a bearing on recognizing, evaluating, or reducing disparities in exposures and health and safety outcomes among workers.
• Programmatic Score (25%) , including an assessment of the following factors:
• Builds research capacity among new investigators and trainees: The research funds provided by this proposal will facilitate investigators working in complementary or non-traditional disciplines to become engaged in occupational safety and health research, junior investigators needing initial support for innovative research areas, and doctoral or postdoctoral trainees undertaking research.  Junior investigators and doctoral and postdoctoral trainees have identified mentors willing to advise them during their research.
• Proposal is likely to lead to further research activities: Greater weight will be given to research ideas that are innovative and have the potential for being developed into proposals for more substantial funding, based on results from this grant.  Applicants should describe plans for additional funding.
• Research has a high potential for impacting the practice of OHS: Translational research ideas or research-to-practice (r2p) projects and research on prevention or intervention will be given high priority for funding.
• Research addresses NORA priorities:   Applications must identify research needs that their research will address among those described in NORA sector and cross-sector research agendas.
• Research involves multiple stakeholders: Proposals for pilot funding that seek to involve multiple interested parties – workers, organized labor, trade groups, companies, government officials, and other organizations – are encouraged. Similarly, proposals that include investigators at academic institutions throughout the Upper Midwest region of Minnesota, Wisconsin, North Dakota, and South Dakota are specifically encouraged.
• Researchers have access to adequate resources and environment: Reviewers will assess if the project can be accomplished in the timeline presented, if the environment in which the research will be carried out is conducive to success, and if the research team has the expertise and guidance needed for carrying out the work.
• Budget: The budget should be appropriate to complete the scope of the work proposed.

FINAL REPORT AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

• Final Report: A Final Report is due within two months following the end of the proposed budget period. The report should include: (a) the title of the project, (b) the names of the investigators and the institutions to which they belong, (c) a 150 word abstract of the research findings, (d) specific objectives and goals, (e) research methods used including study design, population characteristics, data collection methods, data analysis methods, (f) results including all tables and figures, (g) discussion and implications of findings. The report should list publications, presentations and other research-to-practice products arising from this work, as well as proposals submitted for further funding on the basis of the pilot study results. Attachments must include all: (a) documents used in the research effort (e.g., cover letters, survey and other research instruments); (b) presentations; (c) publications; (d) other research-to-practice products (e.g., fact sheets, policy briefs, media reports, white papers); and (e) extramural funds that have resulted, in part, directly or indirectly from this award.
• Acknowledgement: The NIOSH-funded MCOHS ERC Pilot Projects Research Training Program (OH008434) must be acknowledged in all associated presentations and publications. In addition, the following statement must be included in all publications arising from this research: “The contents of this effort are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official view of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or other associated entities.”

Programmatic Questions: Dr. Peter Raynor Phone: 612-625-7135 Fax: 612-626-4837 Email: [email protected]

Budget and Biosketch Questions: Ms. Debb Grove Phone: 612-626-4803 Fax: 612-626-4837 Email: [email protected]

Required Application Instructions

It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide except where instructed to do otherwise in this FOA. Conformance to all requirements (both in the Application Guide and the FOA) is required and strictly enforced. Applicants must read and follow all application instructions in the Application Guide as well as any program-specific instructions noted in Section IV . When the program-specific instructions deviate from those in the Application Guide, follow the program-specific instructions. Applications that do not comply with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.

Telecommunications for the Hearing Impaired: TTY 1-888-232-6348

Part 1. Overview Information Part 2. Full Text of the Announcement Section I. Funding Opportunity Description Section II. Award Information Section III. Eligibility Information Section IV. Application and Submission Information Section V. Application Review Information Section VI. Award Administration Information Section VII. Agency Contacts Section VIII. Other Information

This program is described in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance at http://www.cfda.gov/ and is not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of Executive Order 12372 or Health Systems Agency Review. Awards are made under the authorization of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, Section 20(a) and 21(a) (29 USC 669(a) and 29 USC 670); Federal Mine Safety and Health Act, Section 501(a), 30 USC 951(a); Section 301 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement.

Every day, millions of U.S. workers go to work expecting to return home healthy and safe. The workplace environment, however, can have a significant impact on a worker’s physical and psychological health. Depending on the job, a worker may be at risk for many different kinds of injuries and illnesses. Illness statistics are significantly underestimated due to the difficulty of recognizing or associating illness or disease with past occupational exposures; however, approximately 49,000 deaths per year are attributed to work-related illness. For 2010, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported a preliminary count of 4,547 fatal occupational injuries in the United States, about 12 per day. In addition, 3.9 million U.S. workers sustained either a nonfatal occupational injury or illness. Work-related injuries, illnesses, and deaths are very costly to American society. In 2009, employers spent nearly $74 billion on workers' compensation ( http://www.nasi.org/sites/default/files/research/Workers_Comp_Report_2009.pdf ).

Research and intervention activities are needed to reduce the tremendous burden and cost associated with occupational injuries and illnesses occurring in the American workplace.

The purpose of this grant program is to develop an understanding of the risks and conditions associated with occupational diseases and injuries, to explore methods for reducing risks and for preventing or minimizing exposure to hazardous conditions in the workplace, and to translate significant scientific findings into prevention practices and products that will effectively reduce work-related illnesses and injuries.

Proposals should address the research objectives supported by NIOSH, which include, but are not limited to the following:

• the identification and investigation of the relationships between hazardous working conditions and associated occupational diseases and injuries;
• the development of more sensitive means of evaluating hazards at work sites;
• the development of methods for measuring early markers of adverse health effects and injuries;
• the development of new protective equipment and engineering control technology to reduce work-related illnesses and injuries;
• the development of work practices that reduce the risks of occupational hazards; and
• the evaluation of the technical feasibility or application of a new or improved occupational safety and health procedure, method, technique, or system, including assessment of economic and other factors that influence their diffusion and successful adoption in workplaces.

The Research (R01) grant is an award made to support a distinct, specific, defined project to be performed by the named investigator(s) in an area representing the investigator's specific interest and competencies, based on the mission of the NIOSH.

Healthy People 2020 and other National strategic priorities

NIOSH is committed to achieving the health promotion and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy People 2020" http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/default.aspx. Healthy People 2020 objectives related to occupational safety and health (OSH) are primarily addressed through the National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA). NORA, established by NIOSH and its partners to stimulate research and improve workplace practices, provides a framework to guide OSH research. The goal of the NIOSH research program is to support research that is relevant, of high quality, and that demonstrates impact in reducing occupational disease and injury. Emphasis is placed on research projects that address needs outlined in NORA. NIOSH has created a Program Portfolio to broadly guide activities by categorizing programs into ten (10) major NORA Sector Programs that represent groups of industrial sectors, and twenty-four (24) cross-sector programs organized around adverse health outcomes, statutory programs and global efforts. Detailed information about the Program Portfolio can be found at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/programs/

Applicants must provide a statement about which industry sector(s) and which cross-sectors are being addressed and a rationale for how the proposal will contribute to the specified priority area (this information must be placed in the Project Description/Abstract).

In addition to NORA, NIOSH has initiated a Research to Practice (r2P) initiative to reduce or eliminate occupational illness and injury by increasing the transfer and translation of knowledge, interventions, and technologies into highly effective prevention practices and products into the workplace. R2p is an interactive process in which the occupational safety and health community including researchers, communicators, decision-makers, and employer/employee groups work collaboratively to

• Identify research needs;
• Design, plan, and conduct studies;
• Translate and disseminate existing knowledge, interventions, and technologies to relevant users for
• implementation in the workplace ; and to
• Evaluate results to determine the impact on occupational safety and health.

Additional information about r2p can be found at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/r2p .

NORA sectors and cross sectors

Applicants must provide a statement about which industry sector and which cross-sectors http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/programs are being addressed and a rationale for how the proposal will contribute to the specified priority area (this information must be placed in the Project Description/Abstract).

Outputs and Outcomes

Governmental agencies/organizations have been faced with increasing demand to measure the effectiveness of their funded research in improving public health. Effectiveness can be measured by the products (outputs) of research activities and subsequent outcomes, i.e., benefits or changes at an individual or population level. Outputs are the immediate products or direct result of research activities. Examples include publications, reports, conference proceedings, presentations/posters, investigator career development, databases, tools, methods, guidelines, recommendations, education and training materials.

The causes of work-related injuries and illnesses are complex, and determining the effect that specific research activities have on them can take years. Thus, outcomes can be measured over time as either intermediate or end. Intermediate outcomes are specific changes that occur as a result of research activities. Examples of intermediate outcomes include public or private policy changes, conduct of training or workshops based on project outputs, citations in the literature, inventions and patents, and adoption of technologies or methods developed by the researcher. End outcomes are the ultimate goal of the research and the result of what individuals or institutions do with the knowledge or products generated by the research. Examples of end outcomes include reduction in workplace illnesses, injuries, fatalities, and/or hazardous exposures. Applicants must provide a brief statement about expected outputs and outcomes of their proposed research in the Description (Abstract) and in the Research Strategy (Significance).

See Section VIII, Other Information - Required Federal Citations, for policies related to this announcement

HHS/CDC grants policies as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement ( http://www.hhs.gov/asfr/ogapa/aboutog/hhsgps107.pdf ) will apply to the applications submitted and awards made in response to this FOA.

Higher Education Institutions

• Public/State Controlled Institutions of Higher Education
• Private Institutions of Higher Education

The following types of Higher Education Institutions are always encouraged to apply for NIH support as Public or Private Institutions of Higher Education:

• Hispanic-serving Institutions
• Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
• Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs)
• Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions
• Asian American Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISIs)

Nonprofits Other Than Institutions of Higher Education

• Nonprofits with 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)
• Nonprofits without 501(c)(3) IRS Status (Other than Institutions of Higher Education)

For-Profit Organizations

• Small Businesses
• For-Profit Organizations (Other than Small Businesses)

Governments

• State Governments
• County Governments
• City or Township Governments
• Special District Governments
• Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Federally Recognized)
• Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Other than Federally Recognized)
• U.S. Territory or Possession
• Independent School Districts
• Public Housing Authorities/Indian Housing Authorities
• Native American Tribal Organizations (other than Federally recognized tribal governments)
• Faith-based or Community-based Organizations
• Regional Organizations
• Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions)
• Bona Fide Agents: a Bona Fide Agent is an agency/organization identified by the state as eligible to submit an application under the state eligibility in lieu of a state application. If applying as a bona fide agent of a state or local government, a legal, binding agreement from the state or local government as documentation of the status is required. Attach with "Other Attachment Forms" when submitting via www.grants.gov .
• Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs). For more information on FFRDCs, go to http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=512ff78311f427c00454772dcf21523a&rgn=div8&view=text&node=48:1.0.1.6.34.0.1.18&idno=48 .

Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Institutions) are eligible to apply. Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are eligible to apply.

Foreign components, as defined in the HHS Grants Policy Statement ( http://www.hhs.gov/asfr/ogapa/aboutog/hhsgps107.pdf ), must follow policies and procedures for foreign organizations described throughout the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. International registrants can confirm DUNS by sending an e-mail to [email protected] , including Company Name, D-U-N-S Number, and Physical Address, and Country. Special Instructions for acquiring a Commercial and Governmental Entity (NCAGE) Code: https://eportal.nspa.nato.int/AC135Public/Docs/US%20Instructions%20for%20NSPA%20NCAGE.pdf .

For this announcement, applicants may include collaborators or consultants from foreign institutions. All applicable federal laws and policies apply.

All Program Directors/Principal Investigators (PD/PIs) must also work with their institutional officials to register with the eRA Commons or ensure their existing eRA Commons account is affiliated with the eRA Commons account of the applicant organization. All registrations must be successfully completed and active before the application due date. Applicant organizations are strongly encouraged to start the registration process at least six (6) weeks prior to the application due date.

Applicant organizations must complete the following registrations as described in the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide to be eligible to apply for or receive an award. Applicants must have a valid Dun and Bradstreet Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number in order to begin each of the following registrations.

• (Foreign entities only): Special Instructions for acquiring a Commercial and Governmental Entity (NCAGE) Code: https://eportal.nspa.nato.int/AC135Public/Docs/US%20Instructions%20for%20NSPA%20NCAGE.pdf
• System for Award Management (SAM) must maintain an active entity registration (formerly CCR registration), to be renewed at least annually. Use the Sam.gov Manage Entity function to manage your entity registrations. See the Grants Registration User Guide at SAM.gov for additional information.
• eRA Commons

All applicant organizations must register with Grants.gov. Please visit www.Grants.gov at least 30 days prior to submitting your application to familiarize yourself with the registration and submission processes. The one-time registration process will take three to five days to complete. However, it is best to start the registration process at least six weeks prior to application submission.

Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with his/her organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for NIH support. For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

When multiple PDs/PIs are proposed, NIOSH requires one PD/PI to be designated as the "Contact PI, who will be responsible for all communication between the PDs/PIs and the NIOSH, for assembling the application materials outlined below, and for coordinating progress reports for the project. The contact PD/PI must meet all eligibility requirements for PD/PI status in the same way as other PDs/PIs. For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide ( https://grants.nih.gov/grants/multi_pi ).

This FOA does not require cost sharing as defined in the HHS Grants Policy Statement .

Applicant organizations may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct.

NIOSH will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one currently in review or one reviewed within the past thirty-seven months (as described in the NIH Grants Policy Statement ), except for submission:

• To an RFA of an application that was submitted previously as an investigator-initiated application but not paid;
• Of an investigator-initiated application that was originally submitted to an RFA but not paid; or
• Of an application with a changed grant activity code.See this link for guidance: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/amendedapps.htm

Resubmission applications may be submitted, according to the Policy on Resubmission Applications from the SF 424 (R&R) Application Guide. Such applications must include an Introduction addressing the previous peer review critique (Summary Statement).

Applicants must download the SF424 (R&R) application package associated with this funding opportunity using the Apply for Grant Electronically button in this FOA or following the directions provided at Grants.gov . If access to the Internet is not available or if the applicant encounters difficulty accessing the forms on-line, contact the HHS/CDC Procurement and Grants Office Technical Information Management Section (PGO TIMS) staff at (770) 488-2700 or [email protected] for further instructions. Hours: Monday - Friday, 7am 4:30pm U.S. Eastern Standard Time. CDC Telecommunications for the hearing impaired or disabled is available at: TTY 1-888-232-6348.

It is critical that applicants follow the instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide , except where instructed in this funding opportunity announcement to do otherwise. Conformance to the requirements in the Application Guide is required and strictly enforced. Applications that are out of compliance with these instructions may be delayed or not accepted for review.

For information on Application Submission and Receipt, visit Frequently Asked Questions Application Guide, Electronic Submission of Grant Applications .

A letter of intent is not required for this funding opportunity.

The forms package associated with this FOA includes all applicable components, mandatory and optional. Please note that some components marked optional in the application package are required for submission of applications for this FOA. Follow all instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide to ensure you complete all appropriate optional components.

All page limitations described in the SF424 Application Guide and the Table of Page Limits must be followed

All instructions in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide must be followed, with the following additional instructions:

• All applications should address one of the NIOSH Program Priority areas NIOSH Program Portfolio .
• Applicants should state which industry sectors and cross-sectors are being addressed and a rationale for how the proposal will contribute to the specified priority area. This information should be placed in the "Background and Significance" section of the "Research Plan" of the application.
• Detailed information about the NIOSH Program Portfolio can be found at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/programs /.
• Applications should also include an explanation of how their proposed research will contribute to the NIOSH Research to Practice (r2p) initiative. This information should be placed in the "Background and Significance" section of the "Research Plan" of the application. Information is available at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/r2p .

Resource Sharing Plan

Individuals are required to comply with the instructions for the Resource Sharing Plans (Data Sharing Plan, Sharing Model Organisms, and Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS)) as provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide, with the following modifications:

• All applications, regardless of the amount of direct costs requested for any one year, should address a Data Sharing Plan.
• Program staff will be responsible for the administrative review of the plan for sharing research resources and data. The adequacy of the resources sharing plan will be considered by Program staff of the funding organization when making recommendations about funding applications. The effectiveness of the resource sharing will be evaluated as part of the administrative review of each non-competing Grant Progress Report (HHS/PHS 2590 .

Do not use the Appendix to circumvent page limits. Follow all instructions for the Appendix as described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

Foreign (non-U.S.) institutions must follow policies described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement. ,and procedures for foreign institutions described throughout the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

CDC requires all text attachments to the Adobe application forms be submitted as PDFs and that all text attachments conform to the agency-specific formatting requirements noted in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide (Part I, Section 2) ( https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/url_redirect.htm?id=12000 ).

Part I. Overview Information contains information about Key Dates. Applicants are encouraged to submit applications before the deadline to ensure they have time to make any application corrections that might be necessary for successful submission.

Organizations must submit applications via Grants.gov , the online portal to find and apply for grants across all Federal agencies. Applicants must then complete the submission process by tracking the status of the application in the eRA Commons , NIH’s electronic system for grants administration.

Applicants are responsible for viewing their application before the deadline in the eRA Commons to ensure accurate and successful submission.

Information on the submission process and a definition of on-time submission are provided in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

This initiative is not subject to intergovernmental review.

All HHS/CDC awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other requirements described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement . Pre-award costs may be allowable as an expanded authority, but only if authorized by CDC.

For more information on expanded authority and pre-award costs, go to http://dhhs.gov/asfr/ogapa/grantinformation/hhsgps107.pdf .

Applications must be submitted electronically following the instructions described in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. Paper applications will not be accepted.

Applicants must complete all required registrations before the application due date. Section III. Eligibility Information contains information about registration.

For assistance with your electronic application or for more information on the electronic submission process, visit Applying Electronically .

Important reminders: All PD(s)/PI(s) must include their eRA Commons ID in the Credential field of the Senior/Key Person Profile Component of the SF424(R&R) Application Package . Failure to register in the Commons and to include a valid PD/PI Commons ID in the credential field will prevent the successful submission of an electronic application to NIH. The applicant organization must ensure that the DUNS number it provides on the application is the same number used in the organization’s profile in the eRA Commons and for the System for Award Management (SAM). Additional information may be found in the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide. See more tips for avoiding common errors.

Upon receipt, applications will be evaluated for completeness by the Center for Scientific Review, NIH. Applications that are incomplete will not be reviewed.

Applicants are required to follow the instructions for post-submission materials, as described in NOT-OD-10-115

Only the review criteria described below will be considered in the review process. As part of the CDC mission ( http://www.cdc.gov/about/organization/mission.htm ), all applications submitted to the CDC/NIOSH in support of occupational health and safety research are evaluated for scientific and technical merit through the CDC/NIOSH peer review system.

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.

Significance

Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

Investigator(s)

Are the PD(s)/PI(s), collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? 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)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance and organizational structure appropriate for the project?

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? 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? If the project involves human subjects research, are the plans for 1) protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion of minorities and members of both sexes/genders, as well as the inclusion of children, justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?

Environment

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? For planned or potential collaborations, is the commitment and cooperation of other interested parties adequate as evidenced by letters of support specifying the nature and extent of their involvement?

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.

Protections for Human Subjects

For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the six 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 six 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 Human Subjects Protection and Inclusion Guidelines .

Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children

When the proposed project involves clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion of minorities and members of both genders, as well as the inclusion of children. For additional information on review of the Inclusion section, please refer to the Human Subjects Protection and Inclusion Guidelines .

Vertebrate Animals

The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following five points: 1) proposed use of the animals, and species, strains, ages, sex, and numbers to be used; 2) justifications for the use of animals and for the appropriateness of the species and numbers proposed; 3) adequacy of veterinary care; 4) procedures for limiting discomfort, distress, pain and injury to that which is unavoidable in the conduct of scientifically sound research including the use of analgesic, anesthetic, and tranquilizing drugs and/or comfortable restraining devices; and 5) methods of euthanasia and reason for selection if not consistent with the AVMA Guidelines on Euthanasia. For additional information on review of the Vertebrate Animals section, please refer to the Worksheet for Review of the Vertebrate Animal Section .

Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.

Resubmissions

For Resubmissions, the committee will evaluate the application currently submitted taking into consideration the response to comments from the previous scientific review group and changes made to the application.

For Renewals, the committee will consider the progress made in the last funding period.

For Revisions, the committee will consider the appropriateness of the proposed expansion of the scope of the project. If the Revision application relates to a specific line of investigation presented in the original application that was not recommended for approval by the committee, then the committee will consider whether the responses to comments from the previous scientific review group are adequate and whether substantial changes are clearly evident.

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.

Does the applicant provide a statement about which NORA sector(s) and cross-sector(s) are being addressed and a rationale for how the proposal will contribute to the specified priority area?

Does the applicant provide information about how their proposal addresses r2P?

Does the applicant provide information about the expected outcomes and outputs and how this research will impact the field of occupational health and safety?

Applications from Foreign Organizations

Reviewers will assess whether the project presents special opportunities for furthering research programs through the use of unusual talent, resources, populations, or environmental conditions that exist in other countries and either are not readily available in the United States or augment existing U.S. resources.

Select Agent Research

Not Applicable

Resource Sharing Plans

HHS/CDC policy requires that recipients of grant awards make unique research resources and data readily available for research purposes to qualified individuals within the scientific community after publication. Please see: HHS Grants Policy Statement

Investigators responding to this funding opportunity should include a plan on sharing research resources and data.

Reviewers will comment on whether the following Resource Sharing Plans, or the rationale for not sharing the following types of resources, are reasonable: 1) Data Sharing Plan ; 2) Sharing Model Organisms ; and 3) Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS) .

Program staff will be responsible for the administrative review of the plan for sharing research resources and data. The adequacy of the resources sharing plan will be considered by Program staff of the funding organization when making recommendations about funding applications. The effectiveness of the resource sharing will be evaluated as part of the administrative review of each non-competing Grant Progress Report (HHS/PHS 2590; https://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/2590/2590.htm ). See Section VI.3.Reporting

Budget and Period of Support

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 peer review group, in accordance with CDC/NIOSH peer review policy and procedures, using the stated review criteria.

As part of the scientific peer review all applications will receive a written critique. 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/priority score.

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 for programmatic relevance. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:

• Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as determined by scientific peer review.
• Availability of funds.
• Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.

After the peer review of the application is completed, the PD/PI will be able to access his or her Summary Statement (written critique) via the eRA Commons .

Information regarding the disposition of applications is available in the HHS Grants Policy Statement .

If the application is under consideration for funding, NIOSH will request "just-in-time" information from the applicant as described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement . 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 grantee’s business official. Awardees must comply with any funding restrictions described in Section IV.5. 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.

Any application awarded in response to this FOA will be subject to the DUNS, SAM Registration, and Transparency Act requirements as noted on the Award Conditions and Information for NIH Grants website.

All HHS/CDC grant and cooperative agreement awards include the HHS Grants Policy Statement as part of the NoA. For these terms of award, see the HHS Grants Policy Statement Part II: Terms and Conditions of Award ( http://dhhs.gov/asfr/ogapa/grantinformation/hhsgps107.pdf ).

Additional requirements are available at the following internet address: http://www.cdc.gov/grants/additionalrequirements/index.html

Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions of Award

Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006: Public Law 109-282, the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 as amended (FFATA), requires full disclosure of all entities and organizations receiving Federal funds including grants, contracts, loans and other assistance and payments through a single publicly accessible Web site, www.USASpending.gov ( http://www.usaspending.gov/ ). The web site includes information on each Federal financial assistance award and contract over $25,000, including such information as

1. The name of the entity receiving the award

2. The amount of the award

3. Information on the award including transaction type, funding agency, etc.

4. The location of the entity receiving the award

5. A unique identifier of the entity receiving the award; and

6. Names and compensation of highly-compensated officers (as applicable)

Compliance with this law is primarily the responsibility of the Federal agency. However, two elements of the law require information to be collected and reported by recipients: 1) information on executive compensation when not already reported through the Central Contractor Registry; and 2) similar information on all sub-awards/subcontracts/consortiums over $25,000.

For the full text of the requirements under the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006, please review the following website: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s2590enr.txt.pdf

We encourage inquiries concerning this funding opportunity and welcome the opportunity to answer questions from potential applicants.

Grants.gov Customer Support (Questions regarding Grants.gov registration and submission, downloading or navigating forms) Contact Center Phone: 800-518-4726 Email: [email protected] GrantsInfo (Questions regarding application instructions and process, finding NIH grant resources) Telephone 301-945-7573 TTY 301-451-5936 Email: [email protected] eRA Service Desk (Questions regarding ASSIST, eRA Commons registration, tracking application status, post submission issues) Phone: 301-402-7469 or 866-504-9552 (Toll Free) TTY: 301-451-5939 Email: [email protected]

Maria Lioce, MD CDC/NIOSH/OEP 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop E74 Atlanta, GA 30329-4018 Telephone: 404-498-2575 Fax: 404-498-2571 Email: [email protected]

Price Conner, Ph.D. CDC/NIOSH/OEP 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop E74 Atlanta, GA 30329-4018 Telephone: 404-498-2511 Fax: 404-498-2571 Email: [email protected]

Mary Pat Shanahan Acquisition and Assistance Field Branch Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 626 Cochrans Mill Road Pittsburgh, PA 15236-0070 Telephone: (412) 386-4453 FAX: (412) 386- 6429 Email: [email protected]

All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement .

Awards are made under the authorization of Sections of the Public Health Service Act as amended and under the Code Federal Regulations. Awards are made under the authorization of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, Section 20(a) and 21(a) (29 USC 669(a) and 29 USC 670); Federal Mine Safety and Health Act, Section 501(a), 30 USC 951(a); Section 301 of the Public Health Service Act as amended (42 USC 241) and under Federal Regulations 42 CFR Part 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and

92. All awards are subject to the terms and conditions, cost principles, and other considerations described in the HHS Grants Policy Statement .

Digitizing Production Systems pp 347–356 Cite as

A New Model Proposal for Occupational Health and Safety

• Mesut Ulu 11 &
• Semra Birgün 12  
• Conference paper
• First Online: 11 November 2021

1864 Accesses

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering ((LNME))

Occupational health and safety aims to protect the life, health and safety of employees by taking measures for occupational accidents, health problems, occupational diseases and various risks that may occur in the working environment. Even if the assurance systems are fully implemented, the success rate will be adversely affected when it comes to the human factor. Although OHS is subject to various laws and procedures, the processes need to be improved and made lean in order to be implemented successfully. The workplace environment needs to be regular, visible and quickly accessible in order to be safe. Applying lean philosophy for this purpose brings great success in creating this environment. This study presents a “Lean Occupational Health and Safety Model”, which acts as a guide for meeting the occupational health and safety requirements of the environment. The aim of the presented model is to increase the success of OHS practices by making work environments lean and visual. Successful results were obtained by applying the model step by step to a laboratory. The risks identified as a result of applying the model were corrected using Lean Techniques.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Badri, A., Gbodossou, A., Nadeau, S.: Occupational health and safety risks: towards the integration into project management. Saf. Sci. 50 (2), 190–198 (2002)

Article   Google Scholar  

Towlson, D.: NEBOSH: International General Certificate in Occupational Safety and Health. RRC Bussiness Training, London (2003)

Google Scholar  

Coenen, P., Gilson, N., Healy, G.N., Dunstan, D.W., Strakera, L.M.: A qualitative review of existing national and international occupational safety and health policies relating to occupational sedentary behaviour. Appl. Ergon. 60 , 320–333 (2017)

Fawaz, A.A., Jayant, R., Kim LaScola, N.: A classification scheme for the process industry to guide the implementation of lean. Eng. Manage. J. 18 (2), 15–25 (2015)

Birgün, S., Gülen, K.G., Anol, Y.: Yangın söndürme cihazları üretim süreçlerinin yalınlaştırılması, IX . Ulusal Üretim Araştırmaları Sempozyumu Bildiriler Kitabı, Eskişehir, pp. 661–672 (2009)

Baudin, M.: Lean Production: The End of Management Whack-a-Mole. Palo Alto (1999)

Ertay, T., Birgün Barla, S., Kulak, O.: Mapping the value stream for a product family towards lean manufacturing: a case study. In: CD-ROM of International Conference on Production Research ICPR-16, Prague (2001)

Hoppmann, J., Rebentisch, E., Dombrowsk, U., Zahn, T.: A framework for organizing lean product development. Eng. Manage. J. 23 (1), 3–15 (2011)

Ohno, T.: Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production. CRC Press, New York (1988)

Hallihan, A., Sackett, P., Williams, G.M.: Jit manufacturing: the evolution to an implementation model founded in current practice. Int. J. Prod. Res. 35 (4), 901–920 (1997)

Saurin, T.A., Formoso, C.T., Cambraia, F.B.: Towards a common language between lean production and safety management. In: Proceedings IGLC-14, Santiago, Chile, July 2006, pp. 483−495 (2006)

Cudney, E.A., Furterer, D., Dietrich, D.: Lean Systems: Applications and Case Studies in Manufacturing, Service and Healthcare. CRC Press, New York (2013)

Nesic, B., Vasovic, D., Tanovic, P., Nesic, N., Nesic, L.: Lean implementation and OHS. In: The 15th International Conference Risk and Safety Engineering Kopaonik, 16–18 January, p. 232 (2020)

Longoni, A., Pagell, M., Johnston, D., Veltri, A.: When does lean hurt? – An exploration of lean practices and worker health and safety outcomes. Int. J. Prod. Res. 51 (11), 3300–3320 (2013)

Hamja, A., Maalouf, M., Hasle, P.: The effect of lean on occupational health and safety and productivity in the garment industry – a literature review. Prod. Manuf. Res. 7 (1), 316–334 (2019)

Gnoni, M.G., Andriulo, S., Maggio, G., Nardone, P.: Lean occupational safety: an application for a near-miss management system design. Saf. Sci., 53 , 96–104 (2019)

Doğan, Y., Özkütük, A., Doğan, Ö.: Laboratuvar Güvenliğinde “5S” Yönteminin Uygulaması ve Çalışan Memnuniyeti Üzerine Etkisi. Mikrobiyol Bul. 48 (2), 300–310 (2014)

Sukdeo, N.: The application of 6S methodology as a lean improvement tool in an ink manufacturing company. In: IEEE, pp. 1666–1671 (2017)

Babur, F., Cevikcan, E., Durmuşoğlu, B.: Axiomatic design for lean-oriented occupational health and safety systems: an application in shipbuilding industry. Comput. Ind. Eng. 100 , 88–109 (2016)

Dos Santos, E.F., Dos Santos, L., Nunes, L.: Methodology of risk analysis to health and occupational safety integrated for the principles of lean manufacturing. Adv. Soc. Occup. Ergon. 487 (2017)

Wu, X., Yuan, H., Wang, G., Li, S., Wu, G.: Impacts of lean construction on safety systems: a system dynamics approach. Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health 16 , 221 (2019)

Jiménez, M., Romero, L., Fernández, J., Espinosa, M., Domínguez, M.: Extension of the lean 5s methodology to 6s with an additional layer to ensure occupational safety and health levels. Sustainability 11 , 3827 (2019)

Anzen (2020). http://www.gembapartner.com/hizmetler/anzen-guvenligi/

Ulu, M.: İş sağlığı ve güvenliği alanında yalın tekniklerin kullanımı: Bir laboratuvar uygulaması, Master Thesis, Beykent Üniversitesi, İstanbul, Turkey (2017)

Ilbahar, E., Karaşan, A., Cebi, S., Kahraman, C.: A novel approach to risk assessment for occupational health and safety using Pythagorean fuzzy AHP and fuzzy inference system. Saf. Sci. 103 , 124–136 (2018)

Ulu, M., Şahin, H.: Hata türü ve etkileri analizi tekniği ile bir mühendislik fakültesinde risk değerlendirmesi. Electron. Lett. Sci. Eng. 16 (2), 63–76 (2020)

Galante, E., Bordalo, D., Nobrega, M.: Risk assessment methodology: quantitative HazOp. J. Saf. Eng. 3 (2), 31–36 (2014)

Deng, X.W., Feng, Y.X., Liang, L., Jiang, D.X.: Failure tree analysis of security system in large steam turbine. East China Electr. Power 40 (1), 92–95 (2012)

Rausand, M.: Risk Assessment: Theory, Methods, and Applications, vol. 115. Wiley, Hoboken (2013)

Imai, M.: KAIZEN ‐ The Key to Japan’s Competitive Success. Random House, New York (1986)

Berger, A.: Continuous improvement and kaizen: standardization and organizational designs. Integr. Manuf. Syst. 8 (2), 110–117 (1997)

Graban, M., Swartz, J.E.: Healthcare Kaizen: Engaging Front-Line Staff in Sustainable Continuous Improvements. CRC Press, New York (2018)

Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T.: Lean Thinking. Free Press, New York (2003)

Chapman, D.: Clean house with lean 5S. Qual. Prog. I , 27–32 (2005)

Alli, B.O.: Fundamental Principles of Occupational Health and Safety. International Labor Office, Geneva (2018)

Filip, F.C., Marascu-Klein, V.: The 5S lean method as a tool of industrial management performances. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 1–6 (2015)

Monden, Y.: Toyota Production System. Industrial Engineering and Management Press, Norcross (1983)

Kumar, C.S., Panneerselvam, R.: Literature review of JIT-KANBAN system. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 32 , 393–408 (2007)

Spearman, M.L., Woodruff, D.L., Hopp, W.: Conwip: a pull alternative to kanban. Int. J. Prod. Res. 28 (5), 879–894 (1990)

Chand, G., Shirvani, B.: Implementation of TPM in cellular manufacture. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 103 , 149–154 (2000)

McKone, K.E., Schroeder, R.G., Cua, K.O.: The impact of total productive maintenance practices on manufacturing performance. J. Oper. Manage. 19 , 39–58 (2001)

Rishi, J.P., Ramachandra, C.G., Srinivas, T.R.: Keys to succeed in implementing Total Preventive Maintenance (TPM) and lean strategies. Int. J. Mod. Trends Sci. Technolo. 2 (07), 25–30 (2016)

Wireman, T.: Total Productive Maintenance. Industrial Press, New York (2004)

Kusiak, A.: The generalized group technology concept. Int. J. Prod. Res. 25 (4), 561–569 (1987)

Singh, N., Rajamani, D.: Cellular Manufacturing Systems: Design, Planning and Control. Chapman & Hall, London (1996)

Book   Google Scholar  

Irani, S.A.: Handbook of Cellular Manufacturing Systems. Wiley, New York (1999)

Hyer, N., Wemmerlov, U.: Reorganizing The Factory: Competing Through Cellular Manufacturing. Productivity Press, Portland (2002)

Ham, L., Hitomi, K., Yoshida, T.: Group Technology: Applications to Production Management. Kluwer Nijhoff Publishing, Boston (1985)

Rybkowski, Z.K., Kahler, D.L.: Collective kaizen and standardization: the development and testing of a new lean simulation. In: Proceedings IGLC, pp. 1257–1268 (2014)

Nallusamy, S.: Efficiency enhancement in CNC ındustry using value stream mapping, work standardization and line balancing. Int. J. Performability Eng. 12 (5), 413–422 (2016)

Mikvaa, M., Prajová, V., Yakimovich, B., Korshunov, A., Tyurin, I.: Standardization - one of the tools of continuous improvement. Procedia Eng. 149 , 329–332 (2016)

Greif, M.: The Visual Factory: Building Participation Through Shared Information. Productivity Press, Portland (1991)

Bilalis, N., Scroubelos, G., Antonıadıs, A., Emiris, D., Koulourıotıs, D.: Visual factory: basic principles and the ‘zoning’ approach. Int. J. Prod. Res. 40 (15), 3575–3588 (2002)

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Occupational Health and Safety Department, Bandırma Onyedi Eylül University, Balıkesir, Turkey

Industrial Engineering Department, Doğuş University, Istanbul, Turkey

Semra Birgün

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Semra Birgün .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Faculty of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Institute of Production Engineering and Photonic Technologies, TU Wien (Vienna University of Technology), Vienna, Austria

Numan M. Durakbasa

Faculty of Engineering, Industrial Engineering Department, İstanbul Aydın University, İstanbul, Turkey

M. Güneş Gençyılmaz

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Cite this paper.

Ulu, M., Birgün, S. (2022). A New Model Proposal for Occupational Health and Safety. In: Durakbasa, N.M., Gençyılmaz, M.G. (eds) Digitizing Production Systems. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90421-0_29

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90421-0_29

Published : 11 November 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-90420-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-90421-0

eBook Packages : Engineering Engineering (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The Impact of Workplace Health and Safety Conditions on Operational Workers' Productivity( Business Research Project Proposal)

Related Papers

Avanish Dubey

Naveen Kumar

Snobar Hussain

collins wetiatia

Caroline Biron

Dr Sunarsih

Tuan zamilah

RELATED PAPERS

Physical Review E

Nature reviews. Rheumatology

Wayne Tsuji

Revija Za Sociologiju

Marina Peric

Carlos De la Torre

Biomedical Chromatography

Ravi Bhushan

Jual Gula Kelapa Asli

Abdullrahman Al-Shamma'a

Insaf Mekki

Revista Brasileira de História

David Maciel

British Journal of Pharmacology

Journal of Virological Methods

Satyanarayana Tatineni

Amal Lahkimi

Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness

Stephanie Griese

PLoS Genetics

Soraya Beiraghi

Archives of Disease in Childhood

Thomas Anders

Pranali Desai

Advances in Therapy

Renewable Energy

Abdelmajid Jemni

Advances in Data and Information Sciences

Neelam Panwar

PROPONTICA Uluslararası Propontis Arkeolojisi Dergisi / The International Journal of Propontic Archeology , Hiranur Gültekin

Revista Bioética

Jose Eduardo de Siqueira

Anais do XI EGEPE - Encontro de Estudos sobre Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Pequenas Empresas

Francisco Kenedy Q. Aquino

Chemischer Informationsdienst

Paul H. Mazzocchi

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Stop COVID Cohort: An Observational Study of 3480 Patients Admitted to the Sechenov University Hospital Network in Moscow City for Suspected Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Infection

Collaborators.

• Sechenov StopCOVID Research Team : Anna Berbenyuk ,  Polina Bobkova ,  Semyon Bordyugov ,  Aleksandra Borisenko ,  Ekaterina Bugaiskaya ,  Olesya Druzhkova ,  Dmitry Eliseev ,  Yasmin El-Taravi ,  Natalia Gorbova ,  Elizaveta Gribaleva ,  Rina Grigoryan ,  Shabnam Ibragimova ,  Khadizhat Kabieva ,  Alena Khrapkova ,  Natalia Kogut ,  Karina Kovygina ,  Margaret Kvaratskheliya ,  Maria Lobova ,  Anna Lunicheva ,  Anastasia Maystrenko ,  Daria Nikolaeva ,  Anna Pavlenko ,  Olga Perekosova ,  Olga Romanova ,  Olga Sokova ,  Veronika Solovieva ,  Olga Spasskaya ,  Ekaterina Spiridonova ,  Olga Sukhodolskaya ,  Shakir Suleimanov ,  Nailya Urmantaeva ,  Olga Usalka ,  Margarita Zaikina ,  Anastasia Zorina ,  Nadezhda Khitrina

Affiliations

• 1 Department of Pediatrics and Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Institute of Child's Health, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
• 2 Inflammation, Repair, and Development Section, National Heart and Lung Institute, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
• 3 Soloviev Research and Clinical Center for Neuropsychiatry, Moscow, Russia.
• 4 School of Physics, Astronomy, and Mathematics, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, United Kingdom.
• 5 Biobank, Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
• 6 Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
• 7 Chemistry Department, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia.
• 8 Department of Polymers and Composites, N. N. Semenov Institute of Chemical Physics, Moscow, Russia.
• 9 Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Section of Pediatrics, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
• 10 Institute of Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Faculty of Medicine, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
• 11 Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
• 12 Department of Intensive Care, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
• 13 Clinic of Pulmonology, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
• 14 Department of Internal Medicine No. 1, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
• 15 Department of Forensic Medicine, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
• 16 Department of Statistics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
• 17 Medical Research Council Population Health Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
• 18 Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
• 19 Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, United Kingdom.
• 20 Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
• PMID: 33035307
• PMCID: PMC7665333
• DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciaa1535

Background: The epidemiology, clinical course, and outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the Russian population are unknown. Information on the differences between laboratory-confirmed and clinically diagnosed COVID-19 in real-life settings is lacking.

Methods: We extracted data from the medical records of adult patients who were consecutively admitted for suspected COVID-19 infection in Moscow between 8 April and 28 May 2020.

Results: Of the 4261 patients hospitalized for suspected COVID-19, outcomes were available for 3480 patients (median age, 56 years; interquartile range, 45-66). The most common comorbidities were hypertension, obesity, chronic cardiovascular disease, and diabetes. Half of the patients (n = 1728) had a positive reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), while 1748 had a negative RT-PCR but had clinical symptoms and characteristic computed tomography signs suggestive of COVID-19. No significant differences in frequency of symptoms, laboratory test results, and risk factors for in-hospital mortality were found between those exclusively clinically diagnosed or with positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RT-PCR. In a multivariable logistic regression model the following were associated with in-hospital mortality: older age (per 1-year increase; odds ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.06), male sex (1.71; 1.24-2.37), chronic kidney disease (2.99; 1.89-4.64), diabetes (2.1; 1.46-2.99), chronic cardiovascular disease (1.78; 1.24-2.57), and dementia (2.73; 1.34-5.47).

Conclusions: Age, male sex, and chronic comorbidities were risk factors for in-hospital mortality. The combination of clinical features was sufficient to diagnose COVID-19 infection, indicating that laboratory testing is not critical in real-life clinical practice.

Keywords: COVID-19; Russia; SARS-CoV-2; cohort; mortality risk factors.

© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: [email protected].

Publication types

• Observational Study
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
• Hospitalization
• Middle Aged

Grants and funding

• 20-04-60063/Russian Foundation for Basic Research

• Skip to Content
• Skip to Menu
• Increase Text Size

Anton Zavoyskikh, MD

• Specialty: Internal Medicine
• Language(s): English, Russian
• Location: Confluence Health Hospital | Mares Campus

New Patients can Click here to Schedule Online Appointments

Hobbies and Interests

• American Board of Internal Medicine
• MD, Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, Institute of Medicine, Moscow, Russia, 2013
• Residency, Internal Medicine, Moscow City Hospital N64, Moscow, Russia, 2013-2014
• Residency, Internal Medicine, Saint Mary Mercy Hospital, Livonia, Michigan, 2017-2020
• American College of Physicians