Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
NIH 101
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

NIH 101

206

Published on

Published in: Travel, Sports
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
206
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • <number>
  • Fixing: E.g.,
    Where debt service started in 2003 at $13M, then $14M, then $150M, then $16M – I changed $150M to $15M.
    Research Faculty went from “0” in 2003 & 2004, to 100+ in each of following years, I made the earlier years equal to 100+
    The transition between the Actual & Projected values – between 2005 and 2006, sometimes resulted in wildly different values for a handful of schools. When this occurred and I could not come up with a reasonable estimate, I deleted them for a particular analysis for the years in question.
    4 Public schools reported “0” F&A recoveries because they remitted to state – even though instructions said not to do this. When this happened, I substituted the Off-the-books values for 2003 - 2005, and then used the rate to estimate for 2006-08.
    5) FYI: Schools were classified as “research intensive” if they had $120M+ in direct federal G&C research in FY 2005.
  • Even though doubling stopped in 2003, schools still reported substantial growth – 10 -12% between 2003-04, and 6-8% between 2004-05. Frankly, I don’t entirely understand this.
    However, what’s of interest and concern are schools’ expectations regarding the growth in funding over the next three years.
    That is, schools projected growth of 5-6% between 2005-06, in the 2-3% range between 2006-07, and 2-4% range between 2007-08!
  • Again, this shows average year-to-year changes in actual and projected F&A recoveries.
    So, between 2003 & 04’, both cohorts reported increases of around 12%! Between 2004-05, between 4-6%.
    Projected changes between 2006-07 and 2007-08 are in the 2-4% range. No clear data glitch explaining the average predicted change for the research intensives between 2005 and 2006 – approximately 6%
  • This slide depicts actual and proposed changes relative to a 2003 base year, the year in which the NIH doubling ended.
    The data indicate that, on average, the research intensive schools have and/or plan to increase their NASF by a little more than 30% relative to 2003.
    The comparable number for the Other schools’ cohort is a little more than 20%
  • This slides shows the change in average debt service related to the 2003 base year.
    So, for the research intensives, the increase from $7M in 2003 to $13M in 2008, represents an 88% increase.
    Perhaps of greater concern, the increase for the Other Schools’ cohort from $2.1M in 2003 to $5.4M in 2008, represents about a 250% increase!
  • So, between 2003 and 2008, the research intensive schools projected that, on average, they planned to increase their research faculty by about 16%.
    The Other schools’ cohort projected an estimated growth of about 14%.
  • For the research intensives, the schools estimated an overall increase of about 8%.
    However, the Other schools’ cohort reflects a projected growth of more than 35%!
  • Choose from the report selections to create your own report.
  • Transcript

    1. Research Funding Trends: Surviving an NIH Recession February 14, 2007 AMSPC Annual Meeting Tony Mazzaschi
    2. New England Temperature Conversion Chart 50º F • Residents of the Galapagos shiver uncontrollably • People in New England sunbathe
    3. New England Temperature Conversion Chart 32º F • Floridians don coats, thermal underwear, gloves, wool hats • People in New England throw on a flannel shirt
    4. New England Temperature Conversion Chart 0º F • Hawaiians escape en masse to Tahiti
    5. New England Temperature Conversion Chart 0º F • Hawaiians escape en masse to Tahiti • Girl Scouts in New England sell cookies door to door
    6. New England Temperature Conversion Chart - 25º F • The few people left in Miami die
    7. New England Temperature Conversion Chart - 25º F • The few people left in Miami die • New Englanders close the windows
    8. New England Temperature Conversion Chart - 40º F • Washington DC runs out of hot air
    9. New England Temperature Conversion Chart - 40º F • Washington DC runs out of hot air • People in New England let the dogs sleep indoors
    10. New England Temperature Conversion Chart - 460º F • Politicians start putting their hands in their own pockets
    11. New England Temperature Conversion Chart - 460º F • Politicians start putting their hands in their own pockets • People in New England start saying . . . "Cold 'nuff for ya?"
    12. New England Temperature Conversion Chart - 500º F • Hell freezes over
    13. New England Temperature Conversion Chart - 500º F • Hell freezes over • Red Sox win World Series
    14. New England Temperature Conversion Chart - 500º F • Hell freezes over • Texas becomes a “Blue State”
    15. Presentation Outline • The Political Landscape • NIH Funding – The Present and Future • Strife, Squabbles, and Opportunities • Research Capacity
    16. Election Summary Impact • No Democratic Incumbent Lost In The General Election
    17. Congressional Line-Up 109th Congress 110th Congress Senate Republicans Democrats Independents 55 44 1 49 49 2 House Republicans Democrats Independents Vacancy 232 201 1 1 201 233 0 14 -
    18. Medical Schools By Party Affiliation (U.S. House of Representatives) 72.8% 26.4% Medical Schools Democrats Republicans
    19. Election Summary ImpactElection Summary Impact • No Democratic Incumbent Lost In The General Election • Urban States and Districts Have Gained Strength
    20. Election Summary ImpactElection Summary Impact • No Democratic Incumbent Lost In The General Election • Urban States and Districts Have Gained Strength • New York, Massachusetts, Maryland and Michigan Are Back
    21. New YorkNew York Senate • Chuck Schumer – Conference Vice Chair (3rd in Leadership), DSCC Chair, Finance Cmte. • Hillary Rodham Clinton – H.E.L.P. Cmte. House • Charles Rangel – Chair, Ways and Means Cmte.
    22. MassachusettsMassachusetts Senate • Edward Kennedy – Chair, H.E.L.P. Cmte. • John Kerry – Finance Cmte. House • Edward Markey – 3rd Ranking on Energy and Commerce Cmte. • Barney Frank – Chair, Financial Services Cmte.
    23. MarylandMaryland Senate • Barbara Mikulski – Appropriations Cmte. and H.E.L.P. Cmte. • Benjamin Cardin – Will be more active in health arena than Sarbanes House • Steny Hoyer – Majority Leader, 2nd Ranking on Labor-HHS-Education Approps. Subcmte.
    24. MichiganMichigan Senate • Debbie Stabenow – 4th in Party Leadership; Finance Cmte. Member House • John Dingell – Chair, Energy and Commerce Cmte. • John Conyers – Chair, Judiciary Cmte.
    25. Election Summary ImpactElection Summary Impact • No Democratic Incumbent Lost In The General Election • Urban States and Districts Have Gained Strength • New York, Massachusetts, Maryland and Michigan Are Back • Illinois and California Remain Important
    26. IllinoisIllinois Senate • Dick Durbin – Assistant Majority Leader, H.E.L.P. Cmte. • Barack Obama – H.E.L.P. Cmte. House • Rahm Emanuel – DCCC Chair, Caucus Chairman, and Ways and Means Cmte.
    27. CaliforniaCalifornia Senate • Barbara Boxer – Chief Deputy Whip • Dianne Feinstein – Approps. Cmte., Chair, Rules Cmte. House • Nancy Pelosi – Speaker of the House • Pete Stark – Chair, Ways and Means Subcmte. on Health • Henry Waxman – Chair, Government Reform Cmte. • George Miller – Chair, Education and Workforce Cmte.
    28. AAMC MembersAAMC Members Teaching Hospitals Medical Schools New York 52 12 California 25 8 Illinois 21 7 Massachusett s 20 4 Michigan 16 3 Maryland 12 3 TOTAL 146 37
    29. 2005: Support for continuing to increase NIH funding is closely split among Republican staffers. 40% 82% 58% 44% 6% 28% 16% 12% 14% Republicans Democrats Total Total Favor Total Oppose No Strong Opinion Source: Public Opinion Strategies
    30. Election Summary ImpactElection Summary Impact • No Democratic Incumbent Lost In The General Election • Urban States and Districts Have Gained Strength • New York, Massachusetts, Maryland and Michigan Are Back • Illinois and California Remain Important • Blue Dog Democrats and Members of the GOP’s Main Street Partnership Will Be Major Factors
    31. Physicians in Congress (109Physicians in Congress (109thth )) • Bill Frist (R-TN) - transplant surgeon • Tom Coburn (R-OK) – family medicine • Michael Burgess (R-TX) – ob-gyn • Donna Christian-Christensen (D-VI) – family medicine • Phil Gingrey (R-GA) – ob-gyn • Jim McDermott (D-WA) - psychiatrist • Ron Paul (R-TX) - ob-gyn • Tom Price (R-GA) – surgeon • Joe Schwarz (R-MI) – ENT • Vic Snyder (D-AR) – family medicine • Dave Weldon (R-FL) - internist
    32. Physicians in Congress (110Physicians in Congress (110thth )) • Tom Coburn (R-OK) – family medicine • Michael Burgess (R-TX) – ob-gyn • Donna Christian-Christensen (D-VI) – family medicine • Phil Gingrey (R-GA) – ob-gyn • Jim McDermott (D-WA) - psychiatrist • Ron Paul (R-TX) - ob-gyn • Tom Price (R-GA) – surgeon • Vic Snyder (D-AR) – family medicine • Dave Weldon (R-FL) - internist • Steve Kagen (D-WI) – allergist
    33. Researchers in Congress (110Researchers in Congress (110thth )) • Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD) – Ph.D. in Human Physiology • Vern Ehlers (R-MI) – Ph.D. in Nuclear Physics • Rush Holt (D-NJ) – Ph.D. in Physics • 124 Masters • 22 Doctorates • 178 Law Degrees
    34. Political Control Of The Congress Has Changed . . . But The Nation’s Budget Situation Has Not!
    35. Baseline Deficit ProjectionsBaseline Deficit Projections [in billions of dollars][in billions of dollars] -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 2005 2010 2015 Source: CBO, 08/05
    36. Baseline Deficit ProjectionsBaseline Deficit Projections [in billions of dollars][in billions of dollars] -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 2005 2010 2015 CBO Baseline Plus Omitted Items Source: CBO, 08/05; House Budget Democratic Staff, 08/05
    37. FY 2006 Spending [outlays]FY 2006 Spending [outlays] Defense 17% Nondefense 20% Medicare 13% Medicaid 8% Net Interest 8% Other Mandatory 13% Social Security 21% Source: OMB
    38. Medicare and MedicaidMedicare and Medicaid [as a % of total mandatory spending][as a % of total mandatory spending] 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015 Medicare Medicaid Source: CBO Projections for 2005, 2010, and 2015 from CBO’s The Budget and Economic Outlook: An Update, August 2005
    39. Projected Solvency of the Medicare Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund Source: Health and Human Services Press Releases Announcing Release of Annual Medicare Trustees Report 1991-1997 Medicare Trustees Reports, 1998-2005 2001 2008 2015 2025 2029 2030 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2026 2019 2020
    40. FY 2007 President’s Budget Total Discretionary Spending = $870.7 billion (+3.2%) 46% for “Domestic” Spending = $398.3 billion (-0.5%) 35% for Labor-HHS-Education = $137.8 billion (-2.8%) 18% for NIH = $24.8 billion (0%)
    41. Three Questions That DemocratsThree Questions That Democrats Must Answer in 110Must Answer in 110thth CongressCongress 1. How large is the pot of discretionary money? 2. How to divide this money among defense, homeland security, and domestic programs? 3. How to divide domestic money among programs (e.g., NIH versus education versus VA healthcare)?
    42. Growth in Discretionary Budget Authority by Major Agency Agency FY07 Cumul. Growth Request 2001-7 Defense $439.3 B 45.2% Education $54.4 B 35.7% HHS $67.6 B 25.2% Homeland Security $30.9 B 121.0% Veterans Affairs $35.7 B 59.5%
    43. Historical NIH Doubling Intervals Base Year Doubling Period 1938 5 Years  1943 1948 6 Years  1954 1958 3 Years  1961 1968 8 Years  1976 1978 9 Years  1987 1988 10 Years  1998 1998 5 Years  2003
    44. NIH Funding, FY 1995-2007NIH Funding, FY 1995-2007 [in billions][in billions] $0 $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 Current Constant (BRDPI) [Decline in real dollars of ~10%]
    45. NIH Funding History FYs 1995-2006 [in billions] Year Current $ % change Constant $ % change 1995 $11.300 3.1% $11.300 --- 1996 $11.928 5.6% $11.717 3.7% 1997 $12.741 6.8% $12.286 4.9% 1998 $13.675 7.3% $12.901 5.0% 1999 $15.629 14.3% $14.339 11.1% 2000 $17.821 14.0% $15.785 10.1% 2001 $20.458 14.8% $17.485 10.8% 2002 $23.296 13.9% $19.333 10.6% 2003 $27.067 16.2% $21.585 11.6% 2004 $27.800 2.7% $21.434 -0.7% 2005 $28.365 2.0% $21.168 -1.2% 2006 $28.510 0.5% $20.630 -2.5% Source: NIH
    46. NIH Research Project Grants FYs 1996-2006 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 1996 1999 2002 2005 Competing Non-competing Source: 1996-2005 data from the NIH FY 2006 Congressional Justification
    47. Success Rates for RPGsSuccess Rates for RPGs FYs 1996-2006FYs 1996-2006 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 1996 1999 2002 2005 Source: 1996-2005 data from the NIH FY 2006 Congressional Justification
    48. New Grant Applications and Success Rates During and After Doubling Period Success Rates Applications Projected NumberofApplications %SuccessRateofGrantsFunded 31% 19% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,00 0 22% 49,656 43,069 24,154 8,303 new apps 8,359 new apps Source: NIH
    49. NIH Competing RPGs Applications Per Applicant 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 Appplications/Applicant Source: NIH Office of Extramural Research
    50. FY 2007 FY 2006 Adjusted: $28.312 Billion FY 2007 Joint Resolution: $28.931 Billion +$619.5 Million (+2.2%)
    51. FY 2007 – Joint Resolution +$619.5 Million: +$483M for the Common Fund -$82M already in OD for Common Fund +$58M for Children’s Study +$91M for Young Investigators +$43M for NLM, NCMHD, NCRR +$7M for Reauthorization Implementation +$20M in HHS Transfers
    52. FY 2007 – Joint Resolution • $483M for Common Fund: In past years, ICs contributed a uniform percentage of their appropriation to the fund. Now contribution defined by Congress • Most ICs will appear as level-funded – but without Common Fund contribution, will get an increase ( NCI +$43M) • $69M for Children’s Health Study (+$58M), but moved from NICHD to OD (total cost - $2.7B). • $40M of Common Fund to Junior Pioneer award program – high risk research; smaller amounts; funded up-front. • $91M to OD for young investigators; ICs asked to maintain level of awards to first-time investigators.
    53. FY 2007 – Power Shift
    54. FY 2008 FY 2006 Adjusted: $28.312 Billion FY 2007 Joint Resolution: $28.931 Billion FY 2008 Bush Proposal: $28.621 Billion
    55. Total RPGs FY 2006 (NIH): 38,317 FY 2007 (Bush): 38,089 FY 2007 (Joint Resolution): 39,287 FY 2008 (Bush): 38,063
    56. Training Slots FY 2006 (NIH): 17,325 FY 2007 (Bush): 17,576 FY 2007 (Joint Resolution): ? FY 2008 (Bush): 17,520
    57. FY 2008 Advocacy Get NIH “Back on Track”: • Bush proposal = 13% cut in inflation adjusted dollars since FY 2003 Three year plan to restore NIH funding: • +6.7 percent in FY 2008, 2009, and 2010 to restore NIH to FY 2003 level Endorsed by: AAMC, Ad Hoc Group for Medical Research Funding, FASEB, National Health Council, Research!America, and the Campaign for Medical Research
    58. BIRDPI GDP BRDPI FY 2003 2.0% 3.5% FY 2004 2.6% 3.7% FY 2005 3.0% 3.9% FY 2006 3.1% 4.5% FY 2007 2.5% 3.7% FY 2008 2.4% 3.7% FY 2009 2.3% 3.6% FY 2010 2.3% 3.6%
    59. Community Infighting • Size and Quality of the Intramural Program (currently 9.7% of NIH budget) • The Common Fund/Power of OPASI Head • RO1s vs. “The Rest” of the NIH Budget • Basic vs. Translational & Clinical Research CTSAs • The “Haves” vs. the “Have-Nots” • Priority-setting and disease focus • When will IDCs rear its ugly head?
    60. OPASI Office of Portfolio Analysis and Strategic Initiatives  Division of Program Coordination, Planning and Strategic Initiatives 1. Resource development 2. Program evaluation 3. Strategic coordination Alan M. Krensky, M.D.
    61. Research Survey Questions Federal Direct Research ExpendituresFederal Direct Research Expenditures Federal Facilities & Administrative CostsFederal Facilities & Administrative Costs Debt Service (Research Facilities)Debt Service (Research Facilities) NASF Research SpaceNASF Research Space Graduate Student HeadcountGraduate Student Headcount Postdoctoral Trainee HeadcountPostdoctoral Trainee Headcount Actual data for 2003, 2004 and 2005 Projected Data for 2006, 2007 and 2008
    62. 84 Schools Participated in the study. 20 schools in the sample were among the top 25 in terms of their FY 2005 direct federal grants and contracts.
    63. Year-to-Year Percent Change in Average Direct - Federal Research Grants & Contracts 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 All Schools Actual Projected Source: AAMC Research Survey
    64. Source: AAMC Research Survey Year-to-Year Percent Change in F&A Cost Expenditures- Federal Research Grants & Contracts 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 All Schools Actual Projected
    65. Change in Average NASF Research Space – FY 2003 Base Year (n=82) 100% 105% 110% 115% 120% 125% 130% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 All schools Actual Projected Source: AAMC Research Survey
    66. Change in Average Debt Service - FY 2003 Base Year 100% 120% 140% 160% 180% 200% 220% 240% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 All Schools Actual Projected Source: AAMC Research Survey
    67. Change in Average Research Faculty Headcount – FY 2003 Base Year 100% 102% 104% 106% 108% 110% 112% 114% 116% 118% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Other Schools Research Intensive Actual Projected Source: AAMC Research Survey
    68. Change in Average Grad Students & Post Docs -FY 2003 Base Year 100% 105% 110% 115% 120% 125% 130% 135% 140% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Other Schools Research Intensive Actual Projected Source: AAMC Research Survey
    69. NIH Funding, FY 1995-2007NIH Funding, FY 1995-2007 [in billions][in billions] $0 $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 Current Constant (BRDPI) [Decline in real dollars of ~10%]
    70. Medical School Objectives Project The MSOP is an initiative designed to reach general consensus within the medical education community on the skills, attitudes, and knowledge that graduating medical students should possess.
    71. Medical School Objectives Project Expert Panel on Education in Safe and Effective Prescribing Practices: • What should medical students learn in order to become knowledgeable, safe, and effective prescribers of medications (learning objectives)? • What is the ideal educational environment for learning about the optimal prescribing of medications? • What kind of educational experiences would allow students to achieve those learning objectives?
    72. New Resources for Chairs
    73. New Resources for Chairs • AAMC Data Book • AAMC Presidential Memoranda • Faculty Salary Reports • Faculty Roster Benchmarking • Medical School Profile System Reports • Basic and Clinical Department Data
    74. AAMC Data Book Statistical Information Accredited Schools Applicants and Students Faculty Financing Medical Schools Student Financing Graduate Medical Education Teaching Hospitals Health Care Financing Biomedical Research Physician Services Faculty & Physician Compensation
    75. AAMC Salary Survey By Degree By Rank By Region By Department Mean, Median, 25th and 75th Percentiles
    76. Log-In Procedures E-Mail Message Containing a Unique “Token”
    77. Log-In Procedures
    78. Log-In Procedures
    79. Chairs Portal
    80. Other AAMC Information Products • AAMC STAT:  http://www.aamc.org/newsroom/aamcs tat/ • Washington Headlines:  http://www.aamc.org/advocacy/washhi gh/ • CASMail, BasicMail & ClinicalMail:  CAS@aamc.org

    ×