Month: May 2011

Fiscal Year 2011 Funding Policy

3 comments

As you may be aware, the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011 (Public Law 112-10) enacted on April 15 provides Fiscal Year 2011 funds for NIH and NIGMS at a level approximately 1% lower than those for Fiscal Year 2010.

NIH has released a notice outlining its fiscal policy for grant awards. This notice includes reductions in noncompeting awards to allow the funding of additional new and competing awards.

For noncompeting awards:

  • Modular grants will be awarded at a level 1% lower than the current Fiscal Year 2011 committed level.
  • Nonmodular grants will not receive any inflationary increase and will be reduced by an additional 1%.
  • Awards that have already been issued (typically at 90% of the previously committed level) will be adjusted upward to be consistent with the above policies.

For competing awards:

  • Based on the appropriation level, we expect to make approximately 866 new and competing research project grant awards at NIGMS, compared to 891 in Fiscal Year 2010.
  • It is worth noting that we received more new and competing grant applications this fiscal year—3,875 versus 3,312 in Fiscal Year 2010.

The NIGMS Fiscal Year 2011 Financial Management Plan (link no longer available) has additional information, including about funding of new investigators and National Research Service Award stipends.

NIGMS Glue Grant Assessment Report

0 comments

Last November, I announced that NIGMS was conducting an assessment of its Large-Scale Collaborative Project Awards (glue grant) program and solicited your input.

We have now posted the report of this assessment, which is based on an analysis of input from six different sources, including comments we received from the scientific community.

The assessment’s conclusion is that the glue grant program has had mixed results. All of the projects accomplished some of their goals, and some of the projects had a substantial impact in their fields. However, the assessment also found that the program as a whole had not achieved outcomes commensurate with the scope of the awards and the overall investment in them.

The panel members felt that “the successes and challenges of the Glue Grant Awards Program provide a useful guide for the development of future programs.” While they recommended discontinuing the program as it currently exists, they did not recommend abandoning all support for collaborative research, even in the face of tighter budgets. Rather, they suggested a number of ways to improve support for larger-scale projects and indicated that these projects cannot be accomplished with R01 grant support alone.

Last week, I presented the outcomes of the assessment to our Advisory Council, which embraced the recommendations of the assessment panel and encouraged NIGMS to develop alternative mechanisms to support the varied accomplishments that were supported through the glue grant program. We will take the report and Council’s advice into consideration as we develop future plans for funding collaborative research.

Feedback Loop Feedback: Tell Us What You Want

0 comments

The Feedback Loop blog, with its 165 posts and 418 comments, has become an important tool for communicating with you.

As the blog enters its third year, we will continue to use it to share news of NIGMS funding opportunities, meetings and activities, job openings and grant-related changes. But, as with any blog, we really want to generate posts that spark an open dialogue.

Tell us what posts you want to read by e-mailing me, adding a comment here or using the “Suggest a Post” option near the top of the site. Is there a policy or process we can demystify, a trend we can explain or an area of funding we should highlight? You can propose any topic that might interest our broader NIGMS grantee and applicant audience. While you’re at it, you can also tell us what you don’t want to read about!

Council Tribute to Director Berg

1 comment

At today’s National Advisory General Medical Sciences Council meeting, member Howard Garrison offered the following statement to Jeremy Berg on behalf of the entire Council:

“In appreciation of your 7 years of leadership at NIGMS, the members of the Council express their profound gratitude to you for your distinguished service to science and the nation. We recognize your outstanding work in the pursuit of excellence in research and education, mentoring and advocacy for basic research. Your willingness to deal directly with challenging issues has earned you our respect and admiration. It has been a pleasure and an honor to work with you, and we will miss you. We wish you continued success in your new endeavors.”