Skip to content

NIH Outlines Spending Plan for $10.4 Billion of Economic Recovery Package Funding

Today in a briefing at the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Acting NIH Director Raynard Kington provided an outline of the plan his agency will utilize to spend the $10.4 billion provided in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. However, Dr. Kington mentioned many times during the briefing that the details of the plan are still being worked out within NIH and the Office of Management and Budget. NIH plans to obligate the funding provided within two years and does not assume that funding will be added to the base budget.  He added that there will be no across-the-board percentage increases in grants or programs. 
 
Dr. Kington emphasized that use of the economic recovery money would not be business as usual; there will be unprecedented reporting requirements, such as information on economic impact and the number of jobs created and retained as a result of a research grant. 

Dr. Kington described the funding streams in the bill as follows:  

  • $8.2 billion for research activities, of which $7.4 billon is to be allocated across the NIH Institutes, Centers, Divisions, and the Common Fund (which includes cross-cutting activities such as the NIH Roadmap); $800 million will remain in the Office of the Director; 
  • $1 billion for extramural construction, repairs, and alterations through the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR); the review process for construction and renovation projects has not been determined (operating funds will not be provided); 
  • $300 million for shared instrumentation;
  • $500 million for construction and improvements on the NIH campus; and
  • $400 million transferred from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality for comparative effectiveness research. 

Research funding will be allocated in three general ways:

  • Funding of grant applications from FY08 and FY09 that were judged to be “highly scientifically meritorious” but not funded.  Among the criteria of the selection process will be whether meaningful progress toward project goals can be achieved with two years of committed funds, rather than the usual four years of funding.  
  • Supplements to existing grants to accelerate and/or expand their work.  This may include added equipment, training positions, and summer jobs for students.  Such additions will not be made by formula, but will be based on scientific opportunity and public health needs.  The new money will not be used to restore cuts made to project proposals during earlier negotiations.  
  • NIH Challenge Grants.  There will be a “reasonable” number of awards made under this new program aimed at supporting cross-cutting research. The Institutes, Centers, and Divisions will have an opportunity to identify areas in which they would like to see applications.  NIH will issue a Request for Applications for the program soon.  

Funding will not be provided in a lump sum, but over a two year period. Given that we are dealing with funds intended to stimulate the nationally economy, geography will be a factor in awarding funding. Additionally, there will be some focus on new investigators and junior scientists. When asked if the grants would have carryover authority, Dr. Kington reminded participants that the money was intended as “a short-term stimulus” and said universities should not ask for money they didn’t think they could spend in two years. Dr. Kington explained that in rare cases, no-cost extensions may need to be granted. However, he also explained that at the end of two years, grants that have not been spent will draw scrutiny by government and result in significant embarassment to the scientific community. Dr. Kington did not give a timetable for the release of further details, but given the two-year timetable for use of funds, he expects details to be laid out in the next few weeks.

Cabinet Nominations Create Difficulties for President

The confirmation process for President-elect Obama’s remaining cabinet nominees went somewhat off track last week; as Tom Daschle’s nomination was derailed due to federal income tax issues. Mr. Daschle’s decision to withdraw from the confirmation process was seen as a significant setback by those seeking to advance health care reform later this year. The former Senate Majority Leader’s knowledge of the inner workings of Congress would have been helpful in advancing an overhaul of the nation’s health care system. The unsuccessful nomination of Tom Daschle combined with the failed nominations of Governor Bill Richardson (D-NM) for Secretary of Commerce, Nancy Killefer for the new Chief Performance Officer post, delayed confirmation for Hilda Solis (D-CA) to be Secretary of Labor, as well as the tumultuous confirmation of Timothy Geithner for Secretary of Treasury has transformed a seemingly smooth transition into a period of difficulty for the President. President Obama hopes to regain footing in the confirmation process with his nomination of Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) to head the Department of Commerce. A decision on a replacement for Mr. Daschle is not expected soon, but some names mentioned by speculators as possibilities include Governors Phil Bredesen (D-TN) and Kathleen Sebelius (D-KS).

Veterans Affairs Offers GI Bill Implementation Guidance

Last month, the Department of Veterans Affairs conducted GI Bill implementation meetings around the country. The PowerPoint presentation utilized in the sessions is available for download at www.acenet.edu/stws under the heading “ACE, VA Convened Regional Meetings on New GI Bill Implementation.” Additionally, application guidelines for the ACE/Wal-Mart Success for Veterans Award Grants are also available on this web site.

NSF Releases Report on Cost Sharing for Public Comment

As part of a continuing review of cost-sharing policies at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Science Board (NSB) issued a report on January 21st, which reaffirms that mandatory cost sharing should be required for a limited number of programs where it is appropriate and recommends prohibiting “voluntary committed” cost sharing in solicited and unsolicited grant proposals (“voluntary committed” cost sharing means that institutional resources are formally pledged to a specific sponsored project, and the pledge is binding and auditable to that project when the grant is awarded).

The NSB report “Investing in the Future: NSF Cost Sharing Policies for a Robust Federal Research Enterprise” makes several important recommendations. The NSB is requesting written comments about the recommendations by Monday, February 16, 2009.

The draft NSF report can be found at: http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/committees/cs/index.jsp