Contact Site Map Home APA Online Public Policy Home Public Policy Home
PPO Masthead
Science Policy Public Interest Policy Education Policy News Take Action Fellowships About PPO

SPIN - Science Policy Insider NewsAPA's Science Policy Insider News
February 2004

[Subscribe to SPIN

Modest Research Funding Increases in Current Fiscal Year; President's Budget Proposal for Research Funding Agencies called "Disappointing" for Fiscal Year 2005

On January 23, 2004, Congress finally approved the Fiscal Year (FY) 2004 omnibus appropriations bill containing funds for the Department of Health and Human Services, National Science Foundation (NSF), and other federal agencies. In this bill, Congress has provided a record-setting $127 billion for federal research and development. However, 93 percent of the increase goes to just three agencies: the Department of Defense (DOD), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and National Institutes of Health (NIH), with DOD accounting for 80 percent of the increase.

The omnibus bill includes an across-the-board cut of 0.59 percent for all agencies except the Department of Defense, even those whose budgets were signed into law in 2003. DOD's Research and Development (R&D) budget increases 13 percent to reach a total of $66.3 billion, and the DHS budget gets a 56 percent boost to $1.04 billion.

Other research agencies do not fare as well. The omnibus bill adds $847 million to NIH for a total of $27.1 billion, a modest 3 percent increase after five years of 15 percent increases. Congress provides a five percent increase for NSF, with a total budget of $5.6 billion, $4.1 billion of which is allocated for R&D. The Department of Veteran's Affairs (VA) receives a 2.5 percent increase, bringing its R&D budget to $820 million. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) spending will hold steady at $15.4 billion, while R&D funding within NASA actually declines 0.4 percent to $11.0 billion. The omnibus spending bill provides a $2.9 billion increase for the Department of Education, up four percent from FY03.

Just as we began to absorb those numbers, the Bush Administration released its Fiscal Year 2005 (FY05) budget proposal on February 2, 2004. Highlights of the research agency budget requests appear below.

National Science Foundation: The NSF's FY 2005 budget request is $5.745 billion, a three percent increase, or approximately $167 million over this year's enacted appropriation for NSF ($5.6 billion). A total of $2.845 billion - a $56 million increase over FY 2004 - is requested for "Ideas," representing 49 percent of NSF's total budget. "Ideas" is one of four strategic goals for NSF in FY 2005. It comprises direct research awards to investigators, centers programs, international activities, research funding for five top "priority areas" including the behavioral priority area, "Human and Social Dynamics," and a new $5 million Innovation Fund to enable NSF to respond quickly to rapidly emerging activities at the frontiers of learning and discovery.

Department of Defense: The DoD budget includes a basic and applied research request for $10.55 billion. This is 12.7 percent less than the Fiscal Year 2004 funding level, but an increase over the President's request of last year. The budget request for specific behavioral science programs was not available at press time.

[back to top]

National Institutes of Health: The administration's budget requests a disappointingly modest 2.6 percent increase for NIH, bringing its funding to $28.8 billion. NIH would fund 258 added research project grants with its increase, but growth in numbers would mean cuts in funding for all research projects. NIH would cut back on the annual "cost-of-living" increases on non-competing continuation grants and limit cost increases on new and successfully re-competed projects to one percent, thereby creating more grants funded at lower levels. The NIH Roadmap for Biomedical Research would receive $237 million if the President's proposal is enacted, an increase of $109 million over FY 2004. Within that amount, the Office of the Director would receive $60 million, an increase of $25 million, to disburse through the NIH Director's Discretionary Fund. The remaining $177 million would come from NIH institutes and centers, each of which would contribute .63 percent of its budget request. Research training would receive an increase of $15 million, or two percent, for a total of $764 million. The proposal includes funding for 17,791 research trainees, up 225 from FY 2004. APA is advocating a ten percent increase in NIH funding, to $30.6 billion.

Bioterrorism: Government-wide, funding for terrorism countermeasures is an area of budget increase, but not in all cases. Two bioterrorism preparedness programs are cut: the Health Resources and Services Administration's hospital preparedness program loses $39 million, a cut of 7.5 percent; and the Center for Disease Control's State and Local preparedness program loses $105 million, or 11 percent. The latter amount is redirected into a new biosurveillance initiative that stresses new technologies at the expense of trained personnel who are needed to provide the response when early warnings of disease or attack occur.

Department of Homeland Security: DHS receives a 10.5 percent increase in the President's budget. The2005 Budget requests just over one billion dollars for
research and development. Within DHS, the Directorate of Science and Technology (S&T) serves as a centralized R&D arm that consolidates piecemeal R&D efforts into one agency. Its focus is to harness revolutionary technology, which can be used by law enforcement and emergency response personnel in carrying out their mission to protect the Nation. S&T works to solicit proposals and seeks to engage the established U.S. R&D community in the fight against terrorism.

[back to top]

National Aeronautics and Space Administration: The 2005 NASA budget provides $9.4 billion for federal science and technology programs, a 1.3-percent increase over the 2004 level. ?The 2005 Budget supports the President's new initiative of sustained solar system exploration involving both humans and robots. This initiative encompasses programs of lunar exploration; further robotic exploration of the solar system; focused exploration of Mars to accelerate the search for water and life and to prepare for future human exploration; and robotic space exploration; and refocused Space Station research on activities that support space-exploration goals.

Institute of Education Sciences (IES): The 2005 Budget provides a total of $449.6 million for the broad activities of the institute, including $91.4 million for statistics, and $94.8 million for National Assessment of Educational Progress.. . The President's budget includes a $20 million increase in funding for research, development, and dissemination ($185 million in 2005), which supports research programs on cognition and student learning and other research to advance understanding of how students learn and identify effective approaches and interventions to improve education. The Administration has also provided $78 million for research and innovation in special education research in 2005, which was previously funded through the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services

Release of the President's budget is only the first step in the yearly cycle by which federal programs are funded. A budget must be approved by the U.S. House and Senate, and each of 14 appropriations, or spending, bills, encompassing different combinations of federal agencies, must be approved by both Houses of Congress and signed by the President. 

[back to top]

An Orange Alert for Social Science in the House

In the July issue of SPIN, we discussed efforts to educate Senate staff about the important role social and behavioral sciences have played, and will continue to play, in homeland security and counter terrorism. The reason? Senator Akaka (D-HI) introduced a bill excluding social sciences from eligibility for a fellowship program outlined in the Homeland Security Federal Workforce Act (S.589) [PDF]. Despite our efforts and much to our chagrin, the bill passed the Senate November 5 and was subsequently referred to two House Committees (Committee on Government Reform and Committee on Education and the Workforce) for further consideration. This turn of events was troubling on two fronts: 1) because we thought we had successfully corrected the misperceptions of senate staff, and 2) because there was little reason to believe the bill would actually move to the floor of the Senate for a vote. With a renewed appreciation for how fickle the legislative process can be, we are redoubling our efforts to amend this language in the House. The report (S. 108-119) that accompanied S.589 did not provide any rationale for the exclusion, and Senate staff gave us only a vague sense as to why it had been incorporated - that they thought there were already too many social scientists working in government.

Determined not to let such language stand in the House version of the bill, science policy staff have been working with both Committees to see that the language is revised. Our efforts on the Hill will continue to augment a stance spelled out by APA CEO Norman Anderson in his January 26 letter to all 84 Members across both Committees (see below link to letter). Given that the bill was initiated by Senate democrats and that the November elections will markedly compress the legislative calendar, it seems unlikely that this bill will move forward in the House. But given our recent experience with S. 589 in the Senate, it is clear that we cannot afford to be complacent.

Read Dr. Anderson's letter to Committee Members [PDF]
Read the Committee Report [PDF]

[back to top]

Board of Directors Task Force on Sexual Orientation and Military Service Convened

APA Board of Directors member Barry Anton chaired a January weekend meeting of the newly-appointed Task Force on Sexual Orientation and Military Service, staffed by Science PPO's Heather Kelly and the Public Interest Directorate's Clinton Anderson. Three members from both Division 19 (Military Psychology) and Division 44 (Society for the Psychological Study of Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Issues), as well as the current president of the American Psychological Association of Graduate Students (APAGS), were appointed to the Task Force by Robert Sternberg during his tenure as APA President last year. The charge given the Task Force was to "consider issues of common concern, including the APA ban on Department of Defense advertising in APA publications." Through a truly collaborative effort over the course of the weekend, Task Force members developed a report for the Board of Directors with implications for research, practice, publication and advocacy efforts. We will report on the progress of these items as they move through APA's official governance system.

NIH Director Responds to Congressional Inquiries into Research

NIH Director Elias Zerhouni issued a strong response in a January 26 letter to Members of Congress who had questioned whether certain sexual behavior grants funded by NIH were appropriate to the its mission. The response includes a two-page letter and a summary of the findings from an NIH review of the human sexuality portfolio. Zerhouni stated that he "fully supports NIH's continued investment in research on human sexuality." The enclosed summary of institute directors' findings further explains the importance of funding research on sexually transmitted diseases, HIV/AIDS, sexual dysfunction and high-risk sexual behaviors. The summary further explains the peer review process and states that all the grants associated with human sexuality underwent the standard peer review process and Institutional Review Board review process. Elements of the human sexuality portfolio will be the focus of a Capitol Hill briefing on March 5, entitled: "Lost in Translation: Public Health Implications of Sexual Health Research." The briefing is sponsored by the Decade of Behavior and the Coalition to Protect Research. 

Read Dr. Zerhouni's statement [PDF]
More information about the Coalition to Protect Research

[back to top]

NICHD Council Updated on the National Children’s Study

On January 29, Peter Scheidt, Program Director of the National Children's Study, briefed the National Advisory Child Health and Human Development Council (NACHHD) on the current status and activities of the NCS. Mandated by the Children's Health Act of 2000, the study is being led by a consortium of federal agencies, including NICHD, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The National Children's Study will examine the effects of environmental influences on the health and development of more than 100,000 children across the United States, following them from before birth until age 21. Dr. Scheidt spoke about the importance of defining "environment" broadly to include social, behavioral, and cultural influences. In keeping with this emphasis on psychosocial factors, Sarah Knox, a behavioral scientist, has recently joined the NCS as a Health Scientist Administrator in the Division of Epidemiology, Statistics and Prevention Research. Dr. Knox, who holds a PhD in Experimental Psychology from the University of Stockholm, Sweden, is responsible for protocol development and oversight of the developmental, behavioral, and social components of the NCS. Dr. Scheidt also updated the Council on ongoing pilot studies, protocol planning, and debate over the type of sample to be used. In addition, the National Human Genome Research Institute has proposed a significant expansion of the NCS to include a large, adult longitudinal cohort to study relationships between genes, environment, and chronic disease. While scientific consultation has concluded that the incorporation of an adult cohort, comprised of parents and all available grandparents, would provide a number of benefits, more planning and details are needed. Dr. Scheidt said that until the funding and schedule for the NCS are confirmed, NCS will continue with its current plans. If the NCS receives the necessary funding of $45 million in fiscal year 2005, the study will be on track to begin in mid-2006.

More information on the National Children's Study

New NIMH Branch to Focus on Aging and Mental Health

On February 2, the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) announced that it was creating two new branches within the Division of Services and Intervention Research. The new Aging Treatment and Preventative Interventions Research Branch will be led by Barry Lebowitz, who will also head the NIMH-wide Aging Consortium. Acting Director Matthew Rudorfer will lead the new Adult Treatment and Preventative Interventions Branch until a permanent director is found. George Neiderhe will also be joining the new aging branch. The creation of a new aging branch was just one recommendation from the NIMH Council Report, Mental Health for a Lifetime: Research for the Mental Health Needs of Older Americans. APA member Steven Zarit, of Penn State University, spoke at the September 2003 Council meeting in support of a new aging branch at NIMH, increased support for training and for a dedicated program staff with expertise in late life mental disorders.

Read the NIMH Council Report [PDF]

[back to top]

New Opportunities for Research Training From the Institute of Education Sciences

The Institute of Education Sciences (IES) recently announced a new opportunity for research training through the Predoctoral Interdisciplinary Research Training (PIRT) Programs in the Education Sciences. The Institute's objectives in creating the PIRT programs are: (1) to support the development of innovative interdisciplinary training programs for doctoral students interested in conducting applied education research; and (2) to establish a network of training programs that collectively produce a cadre of education researchers willing and able to conduct a new generation of methodologically rigorous and educationally relevant scientific research that will provide solutions to pressing problems and challenges facing American education. 

More information about the RFA

Meeting of the National Advisory Mental Health Council

The National Advisory Mental Health Council met on Friday, February 6, and welcomed two new Council psychologist members: Peter Salovey of Yale University, and Sergio Aguilar-Gaxlio of California State University, Fresno. Top on the list of issues for NIMH in the coming year is the impact of dwindling funding increases projected for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and NIMH. The final FY04 budget resulted in a 3.1% increase for NIMH, and the Administration proposed a mere 2.7% increase for NIH in FY05. Faced with tightening budgets, NIMH Director Tom Insel anticipates that the NIMH payline will likely drop from 20% to 18% in the near future. APA and the broader scientific community are advocating for a ten percent increase for NIH in FY05.

[back to top]

NIMH Review of Basic Research Portfolio Underway

As we reported in the October issue of SPIN, the NIMH Council formed a workgroup to review the basic science portfolio at the institute. The NAMHC workgroup has been divided into two subgroups. One subgroup is reviewing the behavioral neuroscience, basic behavioral, and basic cognitive portfolio, while the other is reviewing the basic molecular and cellular portfolio .At this point, the subgroups are still holding their first meetings and ironing out the processes they will use to analyze the balance of basic research in the NIMH's portfolio. In conducting the review, the subgroups have been asked to consider the relevance of the research to mental disorders and to recommend priority areas for research funding. Alan Leshner, CEO of the Association for the Advancement of Science, was selected to chair the Workgroup, "Setting Priorities for the Basic Sciences of Mental Health."

On Friday, February 6, he reported back to Council on the progress of the two sub-groups.. Leshner indicated that the working group would not be going through the portfolio grant by grant, but rather discussing whether specific domains of research are relevant to the NIMH mission. They are currently reviewing the portfolio, looking for areas that are redundant or fail to meet the following three criteria: 1) relevance to the primary focus of NIMH to reduce the burden of mental illness; 2) offer current opportunities for scientific payoff; and 3) feature innovative research. The full workgroup is expected to meet in March and issue recommendations by May 2004.

More information on the workgroup and its membership

NSF Director Rita Colwell Announces Departure

National Science Foundation (NSF) Director Rita Colwell announced that she will step down from her position on February 21, ending months of speculation in the science community about whether she planned to leave the agency prior to the expiration of her six-year contract this summer. According to an NSF statement, Dr. Colwell will become Chairman of Canon U.S. Life Sciences, Inc., "a newly created, Washington-based subsidiary of Canon U.S.A., Inc. whose goal is to identify and develop life-science solutions with potential applications in diagnostics and medical instrumentation." Dr. Colwell, a microbiologist and internationally recognized expert on cholera and other infectious diseases, will also serve as Distinguished University Professor at the University of Maryland, College Park, and on the faculty of The John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, where she will help develop a new international center for the study of infectious diseases, water, and health in conjunction with scientific colleagues from Sweden, Norway, Japan, and Bangladesh." Taking the reins of NSF on an interim basis will be Arden Bement, a metallurgical engineer by training and current Director of the Commerce Department's National Institute of Standards and Technology.

[back to top]

Susan Brandon Appointed to Office of Science and Technology Policy

A year ago, in the February issue of SPIN, we bid a fond farewell to our colleague and friend, Susan Brandon, who served so ably as our visiting Senior Scientist. Susan left to take a position as Chief of the Emotional Processes Program in the Division of Neuroscience and Basic Behavioral Science at the National Institute on Mental Health. There we expected Dr. Brandon would stimulate her colleagues and her grantees to think anew about that given portfolio of research, and for a year she did. But fate intervened when Dr. Jim Griffin departed the Office of Science and Technology Policy, and Susan was appointed to fill the position. Dr. Brandon joined the White House Science Advisors staff as the new Assistant Director for Social, Behavioral and Educational Sciences.

Asked to comment on her appointment, Susan said, "I hope to continue to listen to my colleagues in the behavioral, social and educational sciences - to take advantage of what is known in these sciences that can best advise executive branch science policy." Reflecting on her experience in the nation's capitol to date, Susan said, "What I have found in my two and a half years here in Washington is that policy-makers want to know what the best science is, and scientists want to advise. The challenge is to find a way to get the right groups together so that they can listen and talk with each other in ways that are mutually reinforcing." Susan has demonstrated a knack for doing exactly that. She will continue to facilitate a workshop series, initiated two years ago, designed to bring behavioral scientists together with operational personnel from the law enforcement and intelligence communities in the interests of furthering national and homeland security. The third in the series scheduled for June 2004 is entitled, "The Nature and Influence of Intuition in Law Enforcement: Integration of Theory and Practice," and has been funded by the Behavioral Science Unit of the FBI Academy and the Crime Control and Prevention Research Division of the National Institute of Justice. APA Science Policy staff look forward to this and future collaborations as Susan assumes her new role.

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

Back to Top^

© 2008 American Psychological Association
750 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242
Telephone: 800-374-2721; 202-336-5500. TDD/TTY: 202-336-6123
PsychNET® | Contact | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Security | Advertise with us