|
[Subscribe
to SPIN]
2003-2004 APA Science Policy Fellow
Starts Work at CIA
APA's new Science Policy Fellow, Linda Demaine, JD, PhD,
has begun her fellowship year at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA),
working in the Operational Assessment Division's Research and Analysis
Branch. Demaine completed an APA Congressional Fellowship last year with
the Senate Judiciary Committee, and she is taking time off from her
position as an Associate Policy Analyst for RAND to use both her legal and
research expertise in deception at the CIA.
APA's Science Policy Fellowship program is designed to
provide research psychologists a chance to work in a federal executive
branch science agency for a year. Past Fellows have worked in the White
House Office of Science and Technology Policy, the National Institutes of
Health, and the National Science Foundation. The deadline for applying for
the 2004-2005 Science Policy Fellowship is January 2, 2004, and interested
scientists should contact PPO's Heather Kelly, PhD.
 More
information on the APA Science Policy Fellowship
[back to top]
APA Fellow Testifies on the Future of
NASA
During the last week of October, Science policy staff
worked closely with APA Fellow, David Woods, PhD, in preparation for his
oral testimony before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and
Transportation regarding the "Future of NASA". Dr. Woods'
testimony, which focused on a variety of organizational safety issues, was
particularly well-timed given media reports suggesting that NASA had
down-played concerns about launching a new crew to the International Space
Station two weeks before. The suggestion that NASA was again engaged in
the same sort of flawed risk assessment and decision-making that
apparently contributed to the Columbia disaster led to some very pointed
questioning from Chairman McCain and Senator Hollings, the Ranking
Democrat.
Senator Hollings announced his intention to introduce the National
Space Commission Act (introduced as S. 1821 on 11/5/03) proposing an
external independent advisory body to monitor NASA's response to the Columbia
Accident Investigation Board Report. The bill, with 6 co-sponsors (all
democrats) closely parallels legislation introduced in the House as
reported in the last issue of SPIN.
Read
Dr. Woods' written testimony
More
information on the National Space Commission Act
Read
the Columbia Accident Investigation Board Report
View
a photo gallery from the hearing
[back to top]
APA Fellows Meet with TSA Security Technology Staff
On November 14th, Science Policy staff and two APA Fellows
met with leaders of the Transportation Security Administration's Office of
Security Technology to discuss how psychological science could contribute
to the TSA research and development portfolio. The meeting was an attempt
to follow-up on multiple agendas science policy staff initiated as TSA was
codified in law (PL
107-71). Prominent among those was our interest in placing prominent
psychological scientists on the TSA's scientific advisory panel (SAP). The
security subcommittee of the Federal Aviation Administration's Research,
Engineering and Development Advisory Committee has ostensibly been acting
in that capacity for nearly two years, but not in direct service of TSA
and not addressing transportation security issues beyond the aviation
mode. It appears that letters (see below to link to these letters) we had
sent to TSA requesting the inclusion of behavioral scientists on the SAP
may be paying off, as we received repeated assurances from staff that they
will do their best to ensure that at least one of our nominees will be
included on the panel. The first meeting of the SAP for 2004 is scheduled
for February, and we will report back on the roster as soon as it becomes
publicly available.
More
information on the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA), Public
Law 107-71
Read
the letter to TSA Under Secretary James Loy (3/03)
Read
the letter to TSA Under Secretary John Magaw (2/02)
[back to top]
Sexual Health Grants Targeted By Conservative Group
APA staff were alarmed to learn of an apparent "hit
list" that was sent to the National Institutes of Health (NIH)
following the October 2 testimony of NIH Director Elias Zerhouni, M.D.,
before a joint hearing of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and
Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. At the hearing,
several Members of Congress asked the NIH Director for an explanation of
the medical benefits of a list of ten research projects. The list included
studies of the sexual behaviors of older men, risk behaviors of
prostitutes and a conference on sexual arousal. This line of inquiry
followed on the heels of a House amendment proposed by Rep. Pat Toomey
(R-PA) in July that would have rescinded funding for five of these same
grants at NIH. Currently, Rep. Eliot Engel is circulating a sign on letter
in support of NIH and the peer review process to all members of the House
of Representatives that will be sent to President Bush.
Read
the full article
Learn
more about this threat to the scientific peer review process
Take
action now to protect peer review and sexual health research at NIH
[back to top]
Hitchiker’s Guide to the NIH
Roadmap—What’s In It For You?
There has been a lot of publicity in scientific
publications about the NIH Roadmap. An initiative of NIH Director Elias
Zerhouni, the Roadmap is a collection of 28 new research initiatives
organized in three themes (Research Teams of the Future; New Pathways to
Discovery; and Re-engineering the Clinical Research Enterprise) that are
intended to stimulate investment in crosscutting research areas that no
one institute could fund on its own. Each institute and center at NIH has
given 1% of its budget to a central pool to provide funds for these
initiatives-a total of approximately $35 million for Fiscal Year 2005. The
National Science Foundation has long had a trans-foundation pool of
research funds, but this is the first time a formal program has been
established at NIH.
Research psychologists can be confident that a number of
the Roadmap initiatives are focused on or welcoming of behavioral research
proposals. In many cases, the Requests for Applications (RFAs) arising
from Roadmap initiatives will be reviewed by Special Emphasis Panels
rather than by standing NIH study sections.
The NIH web page contains a great deal of information
about Roadmap
initiatives.
One or more RFAs will be issued for each initiative.
For example, under the theme "Re-engineering the
Clinical Research Enterprise," one RFA has been posted. Psychology is
explicitly listed as one of the disciplines eligible for career support
through the RFA for institutional support entitled, "Multidisciplinary
Clinical Research Career Development Programs." According to the
NIH Guide, "Career Development Programs supported under this RFA must
include a broad representation of clinical disciplines and professions
(e.g., internal medicine, surgery, pediatrics, obstetrics/gynecology,
dentistry, pharmacy, statistics, nursing, psychology) and their various
specialties and sub-specialties. Programs must include a structured core
didactic component and a practical training component in various aspects
of the design, conduct, and analysis of clinical research. Individuals
should be trained in team research settings and will be known as NIH
Clinical Research Scholars (CR Scholars).
Several initiatives are being coordinated by the NIH
Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research in partnership with one
or more NIH institutes. One example is a multidisciplinary research
training initiative on Behavior,
Environment and Biology that was posted on November 19, 2003.
When planning began in earnest for the NIH Roadmap in
early 2003, behavioral and social scientists were initially concerned that
the initiatives might largely exclude behavioral research. Psychologists
and others at NIH worked hard to ensure that behavioral and social
scientists were appointed to the trans-NIH working groups developing each
of the initiatives, so that psychology and the other social science
disciplines could have a voice in, and influence on, the process. APA's
Chief Executive Officer Norman Anderson contacted several NIH institute
directors personally to discuss the composition of the working groups and
the conceptual framework for the Roadmap. As a result of all these
efforts, the behavioral and social sciences stand to benefit along with
the rest of NIH by an increased investment in trans-NIH research and
renewed scientific infrastructure.
More
information on Roadmap initiative areas
Read
the full RFA on Clinical Research Scholars
Read
the full RFA on Behavior, Environment, and Biology
[back
to top]
Any questions?
If you have any questions regarding SPIN or specific
science policy issues, please feel free to contact any of APA’s Science
PPO staff.
Geoff
Mumford, Ph.D., Director of Science Policy
Pat
Kobor, Senior Science Policy Analyst
Heather
O'Beirne Kelly, Ph.D., Senior Legislative and Federal Affairs Officer
Karen
Studwell, J.D., Legislative and Federal Affairs Officer
Sara
Robinson, Legislative Assistant
| 
APA's
Science Policy Insider News