Posts

Posted on

Send Input on Single-Cell Analysis

by
4 comments

Cool Video: Leading Cells with LightNIH is seeking broad input from the scientific community on challenges and opportunities in single-cell analysis, a topic of great interest and relevance to many NIGMS grantees and applicants. Please help NIH shape its future programs in this emerging research area by sending in your opinions. The request for information (RFI) asks for responses on topics including:

  • Current conceptual, technical and/or methodological challenges in the field;
  • Major biomedical research questions that can be addressed by single-cell analysis; and
  • The highest priority tools and resources needed to move forward.

We hope you’ll take the time to weigh in with your opinions and specific examples between now and the March 18 response deadline.

Let me know if you would like to learn more about trans-NIH activities in this area, as I’m a member of the group that issued this RFI—the Single Cell Analysis Working Group of the NIH Common Fund (formerly known as the NIH Roadmap), which provides strategic planning, coordination and support for programs that cut across NIH institutes and centers.

Posted on

Proposed NIH Reorganization and NIGMS

by
8 comments

NCRR task force recommendations.I have previously noted that NIH has proposed creating a new entity, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), to house a number of existing programs relating to the discipline of translational science and the development of novel therapeutics. Plans for NCATS have been coupled to a proposal to dismantle the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), in part because the largest program within NCRR, the Clinical and Translational Science Awards, would be transferred to NCATS and in part because of a statutory limitation on the number of institutes and centers at NIH.

NIH leadership established a task force to determine the placement of NCRR programs within NIH. This group initially developed a “straw model” for discussion and more recently submitted its recommendations to the NIH Director. The recommendations include transferring the Institutional Development Award (IDeA) program and some Biomedical Technology Research Centers and other technology research and development grants to NIGMS at the beginning of Fiscal Year 2012.

As you may be aware, I have expressed concerns about the processes associated with the proposal to abolish NCRR. I hope it is clear that my concerns relate to the processes and not to the NCRR programs, which I hold in very high regard. This opinion is also clearly shared by many others in the scientific community, based on comments on the Feedback NIH site and in other venues.

While there are several additional steps that would need to occur before organizational changes could take place, we at NIGMS are already deepening our understanding of the NCRR programs through meetings with NCRR staff and others directly familiar with the programs. We welcome your input, as well, particularly if you have experience with these NCRR programs. Please comment here or contact me directly.

Posted on

Enhancing Peer Review Survey Results

by
5 comments

One of the key principles of the NIH Enhancing Peer Review efforts was a commitment to a continuous review of peer review. In that spirit, NIH conducted a broad survey of grant applicants, reviewers, advisory council members and NIH program and review officers to examine the perceived value of many of the changes that were made. The results of this survey are now available. The report analyzes responses from these groups on topics including the nine-point scoring scale, criterion scores, consistency, bulleted critiques, enhanced review criteria and the clustering of new investigator and clinical research applications.

NIH Enhancing Peer Review Survey criterion score responses from applicants.

NIH Enhancing Peer Review Survey criterion score responses from applicants.

Please feel free to comment here or on Rock Talk, where NIH Deputy Director for Extramural Research Sally Rockey recently mentioned the release of this survey.

Posted on

Milestone Grant Application

by
0 comments

Standard Form 424 (Research & Related)We just reached a milestone—our 100,000th grant application. Interestingly, it’s for a K99/R00 (Pathway to Independence) award. This program enables promising postdoctoral scientists to receive mentored—and later independent—research support. Given our strong commitment to research training, mentoring and workforce development, it’s somehow fitting that this application is for a program that addresses these needs.

I remember well when I submitted my first independent grant application, R29GM038230. It was for a FIRST award, an earlier program directed toward helping early stage investigators develop their independent careers. I submitted the application before there was a Grants.gov—and even before there were overnight delivery services. Since I was located in Baltimore, not far from NIH, I personally drove the application down to the old Westwood Building, where the predecessor to the NIH Center for Scientific Review (and NIGMS) was housed at the time. After I presented my carefully wrapped box, I watched as it was thrown on top of a pile of other applications that reminded me of the warehouse scene at the end of “Raiders of the Lost Ark”. Needless to say, I was relieved when I got the self-addressed card indicating that my application had been received and assigned a grant number.

While this is just one small example of how much things can change over time, it leads me to think about other changes and other milestones. One major milestone is coming in 2012, when NIGMS will mark its 50th anniversary. It will be a time for reflecting on the great scientific progress that has been made with NIGMS grant support and also on the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead. You can expect to hear more about the events associated with this anniversary as our plans develop.

Posted on

Budget Updates

by
1 comment

NIGMS Congressional Justification FY 2012An important step in the annual budget process is the release of the President’s budget request, which happened yesterday. The NIGMS slice is detailed in our FY 2012 budget justification, which includes a budget mechanism table, budget graphs, a Director’s overview and a justification narrative.

The proposed budget for NIH calls for an increase of 2.4% over Fiscal Year 2010 actual expenditures. The proposed budget for NIGMS represents a 2.5% increase over Fiscal Year 2010.

The reason that the comparisons are to Fiscal Year 2010 is that NIH is currently funded at that year’s level under a continuing resolution through March 4, 2011. As described in NIH Guide Notice NOT-OD-11-037, until a final Fiscal Year 2011 appropriation is enacted, NIH is issuing noncompeting research grant awards at a level below that indicated on the most recent Notice of Award (generally up to 90% of the previously committed level). This is consistent with our practice during the continuing resolutions of Fiscal Years 2006 to 2010. NIH will consider upward adjustments to these levels after a final appropriation is enacted.

Posted on

February 23 Teleconference on NIH Organizational Changes

by
1 comment

The NIH Scientific Management Review Board will hold a teleconference on Wednesday, February 23, from 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. Eastern time. The discussion will focus on the NIH proposal to create a new National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) and its impact on other programs at NIH, including the National Center for Research Resources.

The teleconference is open to the public and time will be available for public comment, but those wishing to make comments need to sign up in advance. Details are in a Federal Register notice Link to external web site.

The toll-free number to participate in the teleconference is 1-800-779-1545. The participant passcode to give the meeting operator is “NIH.”

Posted on

Chemistry at NIGMS

by
0 comments

International Year of Chemistry 2011The launch of the International Year of Chemistry 2011 is a good opportunity to reflect on the NIGMS role in supporting research in this central field of science. NIGMS is the leading institute at NIH in funding chemical research, supporting a range of studies focusing on such areas as the development of synthetic methodologies for new drug discovery and synthesis; the role of metals in biological systems; and the discovery of new analytical techniques for the detection, identification and quantification of human metabolites. In fact, just about every branch of chemistry has a connection to the study of human health.

We’re proud that our support has led to many breakthroughs and significant honors, including 36 Nobel Prizes in chemistry.

We also play a major role in training in chemistry through both research grant support and training awards. In 1992, we initiated the Chemistry-Biology Interface institutional predoctoral training grant program, which today supports chemistry students who wish to be cross-trained in biology and biologists who wish to be cross-trained in chemistry in 23 institutions across the country. And you can frequently find NIGMS-supported postdocs in the labs of leading chemists.

We foster effective mentoring in chemistry in a variety of ways. One example is the mentoring workshops we’ve sponsored since 2005 for new faculty in organic and bio-organic chemistry, who meet once or twice each year.

Representatives from the federal agencies that support chemical research, including NIH, the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy (DOE), the Army Research Office, the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, the Office of Naval Research, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Agriculture and the National Institute of Standards and Technology, meet annually to compare notes on our different programs and discuss cross-cutting issues. These exchanges can lead to collaborations, such as the workshops for chemistry department chairs that NIGMS, DOE and NSF have co-sponsored for several years now to help increase diversity in the ranks of chemistry faculty. You can read reports at http://chemchairs.uoregon.edu/display/GenderEquity.pdf and http://chemchairs.uoregon.edu/urm/images/urmreport.pdf (Links no longer available). And we will participate with NSF and DOE in a “FedFunders Town Hall Meeting” at the American Chemical Society (ACS) national meeting Link to external website in Anaheim on Monday, March 28, from 4:30 to 6:30 p.m. This event is a good forum for meeting and talking with staff from the three agencies.

The staff at NIGMS who handle chemistry research portfolios are always ready to talk with grantees, applicants and potential applicants about chemistry and support for chemistry projects, and we can frequently be spotted at chemistry-related scientific meetings. Miles Fabian and I will be at the Anaheim ACS meeting and John Schwab plans to attend the ACS fall meeting in Denver. We hope to see some of you there.

Posted on

Helping to Reverse America’s “Brain Drain”

by
0 comments

America's Brain DrainA story titled “America’s Brain Drain” that aired this past weekend on the CBS Sunday Morning show featured an interview with long-time NIGMS grantee Frank Bayliss of San Francisco State University (SFSU). It described how he is trying to nurture smart American students who are interested in pursuing science careers, in part through programs funded by the NIGMS Division of Minority Opportunity in Research (MORE). In recognition of his contributions in this arena, Frank received the Presidential Award for Excellence in Science, Mathematics and Engineering Mentoring in 2009.

The segment also featured a MORE-supported student, Damon Robles, who participated in our Bridges to the Baccalaureate program at the City College of San Francisco. He later transferred to SFSU, where he became a Minority Access to Research Careers undergraduate student. Now, he is in a Ph.D. program in physical chemistry at the University of California, Davis.

Our MORE programs represent some of the ways we seek to foster a diverse scientific workforce and prepare students for careers in science-related fields. If you’re interested in finding out how you can support a MORE student in your lab for a summer or longer, contact me at singhs@nigms.nih.gov or 301-594-3900.

Posted on

Training Strategic Plan Draft Posted for Public Comment

by
1 comment

NIGMS Training Strategic PlanIn March 2010, I announced that we were in the process of developing a strategic plan for research training, and I asked for your input.

We heard from more than 300 stakeholders, who included university faculty and administrators, graduate students and postdocs, representatives from professional societies and individuals from government and industry. We also received input from our Advisory Council at its meeting last week.

NIGMS staff and I took these comments into account in producing a draft strategic plan for training. Reflecting the Institute’s core values and vision, the plan encompasses several key themes:

  • Research training is a responsibility shared by NIH, academic institutions, faculty and trainees.
  • Research training focuses on student development, not simply selection of talent.
  • Breadth and flexibility enable research training to keep pace with the opportunities and demands of contemporary science and provide the foundation for a variety of scientific career paths.
  • Diversity is an indispensable component of research training excellence, and it must be advanced across the entire research enterprise.

We’ve posted the draft training strategic plan for public comment. I invite you to read the plan and give us your input. Between now and February 15, you may submit your comments anonymously through our online form.

Posted on

The Funding Decision Process

by
11 comments

I recently described the role that an advisory council plays as the second level of peer review for applications submitted to NIH. One thing that neither advisory councils nor study sections do, however, is make funding decisions. How, then, are these decisions made?

In this post, I’ll describe the process we use at NIGMS.

The Institute is organized into five units: four divisions (Cell Biology and Biophysics; Genetics and Developmental Biology; Minority Opportunities in Research; and Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry) and a center (Bioinformatics and Computational Biology). Once the National Advisory General Medical Sciences Council has met, each unit organizes meetings (referred to as “paylist meetings”) attended by most or all of the program directors within that unit.

During a paylist meeting, applications are discussed and prioritized, beginning with the top-scoring applications. These applications (typically up to about half of the number that are expected to be funded) are given highest priority for funding unless there are specific issues, such as those related to the NIGMS well-funded laboratory policy or other concerns that came up at the Council meeting.

The discussion then turns to applications in the “gray area,” typically extending to about 10 percentile points beyond where we would expect to be able to fund applications if they were awarded in straight percentile order. Each application is discussed, typically in percentile order, although sometimes early-stage investigators (ESIs) are discussed first.

For each application, the responsible program director presents the scientific topic as well as factors such as whether the applicant is an ESI or new investigator, how much other support the applicant has (particularly if the application represents the only support available to the investigator), whether the Council has given us specific advice on the application, whether the scientific area is perceived to be particularly exciting, and how much other research we already support in the general area of the application. The other members of the unit listen to these presentations, and the group then produces a prioritized list of applications.

The other key factor for final funding decisions is, of course, the availability of funds. Funds are provided through the appropriations process, either through a regular appropriations bill or, sometimes toward the beginning of a fiscal year, a continuing resolution that typically funds government programs at the previous year’s level. When it is reasonably clear what level of funds is available at a particular point in the fiscal year, the funds are allocated to different mechanisms and programs (research project grants, training grants, various programs within the Division of Minority Opportunities in Research, and so on) based on our previously established budget. Funds for unsolicited R01s are allocated among the four units within NIGMS that fund these applications (the Divisions of Cell Biology and Biophysics; Genetics and Developmental Biology; and Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry; and the Center for Bioinformatics and Computational Biology), based on the fractions of applications that have scored well enough to be considered for possible funding.

Paylists are then developed using the prioritized lists, with budget adjustments for each application based on NIH and NIGMS-wide policies as well as considerations specific to the application provided by the responsible program director. Applications are paid until the available funds are exhausted. Applications that are relatively high on the priority list but could not be funded with a given allocation are flagged for consideration later in the fiscal year, when more funds may become available. This process leads, over the course of a full fiscal year, to the funding curves we recently posted.