|
[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
|
APA's
Science Policy Insider News