55
A Presentation to the University of Nebraska Medical Center Federal Funding Opportunities Workshop The Implementation Group, Inc. December 13-14, 2005
| Date post: | 18-Dec-2015 |
| Category: |
Documents |
| View: | 216 times |
| Download: | 1 times |
A Presentation to the University of Nebraska Medical CenterFederal Funding Opportunities Workshop
The Implementation Group, Inc.December 13-14, 2005
Outline
Overview and Objectives Federal R&D Overview UNMC R&D Analysis Federal Funding Opportunities
• The National Science Foundation• National Aeronautics and Space Administration• Department of Energy
Merit Review and Proposal Development
TIG Overview
The Implementation Group, Inc. (TIG)
TIG is a full-service consulting firm that assists educational institutions, organizations and corporate entities to target, capture and implement U.S. government and private sector contracts and grants.
• Established: 1994• Location: Washington, DC
TIG: ServicesTIG’s service offerings are focused on the full life cycle of activities associated with being successful in the federal grants and contracts arena. They include:
Capability Assessments and Strategic Planning
Intelligence Gathering
Opportunity Identification and Qualification
Partnership Formation
Liaison with federal officials and private sector funders
Proposal Development and Proposal Enhancement
Project Implementation
Troubleshooting
TIG Partnership with the UNMC
UNMC/TIG Partnership To assist UNMC to increase its competitiveness for federal research and training grants, with emphasis on non-NIH funding. Areas of work:
• Assessment and Analysis• Conduct SWOT analysis
• Infrastructure Improvement• Agency Assistance/Opportunity Identification
• Identify and assist UNMC in pursuing federal grant opportunities particularly at the NSF
• Proposal review and development• Project implementation assistance
Visiting Team
The Implementation Group, Inc.• Joseph G. Danek, Ph.D.
Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
• Jennifer C. Danek, M.D.Consultant
National Science Foundation• Christopher Greer, Ph.D.
• Program Director, Frontiers in Integrative Biological Research (FIBR), Directorate for Biological Sciences
Specific Goals of Visit Review federal funding opportunities at the NSF, DOE, and
NASA particularly in the life sciences Learn more about UNMC R&D capabilities and priorities
Identify (with faculty) the strengths and weaknesses in obtaining funding
Match funding opportunities to interests of faculty groups Develop a preliminary proposal development plan Assist UNMC in executing plan
Current Climate
Key Budget and Economic PointsThe Recent Past To date, the United States has allocated $351 billion for military
operations, security and reconstruction costs in Iraq and Afghanistan. The U.S. Congress approved roughly $70 billion in emergency spending
for disasters.The Immediate Future The FY2006 Defense Appropriations Bill contains an additional $50 billion
for military operations, security and reconstruction costs in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There is an additional $100–200 billion in emergency spending for the recent disasters.
“Baby Boom” retirement era will give rise to much larger annual Medicare expenditures.
Escalating costs associated with maintaining the Federal debt.
Spending America’s IncomeBroad revenue and spending categories in President Bush’s fiscal 2005 budget:
Where it comes from (receipts)$2.1 trillion
How it would be spent (outlays)$2.4 trillion
Individual income tax:$874 billion
Corporate income tax:$230 billion
Payroll tax:$794 billion
Excise tax: $73 billion
Estate and gift tax: $21 billionCustoms duties: $22 billion
Other: $37 billion
$510 billion: Social Security
$490 billion: Discretionary
(non-defense)
$420 billion: National defense(discretionary)
$290 billion: Medicare
$178 billion: Interest on debt
$188 billion: Medicaid
$320 billion: Other
Deficit: $345-$360 billion(with adjustment for revenue uncertainty)
$2.4trillion
Defense
Energy
Agriculture
Transportation
Education
Justice
Housing &Urban Development
EPA
NRC
NSF
Veterans Affairs
Labor
NASA
Departments &
Agencies
Development of the Federal R&D BudgetShowing Fields of Science and Executive and Legislative Decision Units
Engineering
PhysicalSciences
EnvironmentalSciences
LifeSciences
Psychology
SocialSciences
OtherSciences
Fields of Science
National
Defense
Affairs
International
Energy
Agriculture
Transportation
Health
Budget Review Offices (OMB)
House & Senate Budget Committees (Budget Functions)
Agriculture & Related Agencies
Commerce, Justice, State,
Judiciary
Energy and Water
Development
ForeignOperations
VA-HUD-Inde-pendent Agencies
Interior
Labor, Health & Human Services, &
Education
Transportation & Related Agencies
Defense
House and Senate
Appropriations Subcommittee
s
Armed Services
Labor and Human
Resources
Banking, Housing
& Urban Affairs
Foreign Relations
Veterans Affairs
Senate Authorizatio
n Committees
Energy & Natural
Resources
Environment &
Public Works
Commerce, Science,& Transportation
National Security
Economic & Educational
Opportunities
Banking & Financial Affairs
International Relations
Veterans Affairs
Commerce
Resources
Transportation & Infrastructure
Science
AgricultureAgriculture,Nutrition, &
Forestry
House Authorizatio
n Committees
(With significant R&D $)
Judiciary Judiciary
International Science,
Engineering and Technology
International Science,
Engineering and Technology
National SecurityNational Security
ScienceScience
TechnologyTechnology
Math & Computer Science
Agency for International Development
Commerce
Health & Human Services
Interior
National Security &
International Affairs
Natural Resources, Energy, and
Science
Economics &
Government
Human Resources, Veterans, and Labor
General Science, Space & Technology
Natural Resources & Environment
Commerce & Housing Credit
Community & Regional
Development
Education, Training, Employment, & Social
Services
Veterans Benefits & Services
Administration of Justice
National Science and Technology
Council Research Committees
Connecting lines indicate location of agency budget decisions, but not decision sequences.
Environment and Natural
Resources
Environment and Natural
Resources
R&D in the FY 2006 Budget
NASA9%
All
Other
4%
DoD53%
HHS (NIH)22%
DHS1%NSF
3%
USDA2%
DoE6%
Total R&D by Agency: FY 2006 ProposedBudget Authority in billions of dollars
Source: AAAS, based on OMB R&D Budget Data and agency estimates
R&D in the FY 2006 Budget Federal R&D at all-time high of $132 billion this year, but
would barely increase (0.1%) in 2006. In FY 2006, federal research funding would fall 1.4 percent
to $54.9 billion The FY 2006 budget represents a downward shift from
recent trends Cuts across the federal R&D portfolio NSF: most research directorates would stay flat for three
years. Steep cuts proposed to education programs. NIH: budget would increase just 0.5 percent. RPG success
rate would fall to 21 percent. USDA: boosts for competitive grants, but cuts to formula
funds.
Other Agency Funding for Life Sciences: $4.3B (14% of total budget) in 2005
7%
16%
8%
13%34%
22%
Life Sciences Portfolio, Total - $29 billion
HHS – 86% (25.5 billion) Other – 14% ($4.3 billion)
- USDA – 34% ($1.4B)- NSF – 13% ($578M)- DoD – 16% ($695M)- DoE – 7% ($289M)- NASA – 8% ($334M)- Other – 22% ($953M)
“Life Sciences” Research Dollars as Percentage of Total Agency Budget: $29.8B
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
HHS DoE DoD NASA NSF USDA Other
Total Budget
Life Sciences
Source: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf06300/tab4
UNMC R&D Portfolio
UNMC - Federal obligations for science and engineering research and development (R&D) to universities and colleges, by state, institution, and agency: FY 2002 [ dollars in thousands],
DoD1 Development
State and institution Total AID Com Total Research DOE ED EPA HHS Int NASA NSF USDA Advanced Major technology systems
Nebraska, total 91,398 1,600 51 10,860 2,748 2,519 5,593 2,689 144 870 51,091 1,130 1,128 10,771 11,064
Creighton U. 5,718 0 0 0 0 0 0 655 0 0 4,691 0 122 0 250
U. NE Medical Ctr. 35,944 0 0 2,946 427 2,519 0 0 0 0 32,881 0 0 117 0 U. NE Lincoln 45,170 1,600 37 7,914 2,321 0 5,593 0 0 870 12,514 965 306 10,175 10,789
U. NE Omaha 2,770 0 14 0 0 0 0 730 0 0 805 42 700 479 0
U. NE central administration 1,796 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,304 144 0 200 123 0 0 25
UNMC Percent Share of State 39% 0% 0% 27% 16% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 64% 0% 0% 1% 0%
Source: National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics, Federal Science and Engineering Support to Universities, Colleges, and Nonprofit Institutions: Fiscal Year 2002 (Table B-17): Arlington, VA (NSF 05-309) [March 2005]
UNMC as Percentage of Total State Fed. Obligation for S&E R&D
0% 1%0%
64%
0%
27%
0%0%
39%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
TOTAL USDA COM DOD DOE EPA HHS NASA NSF
UNMC
In FY 2002, Nebraska had no ARC, DoT, HUD, Labor, NRC, OJP, or SSA funding.
National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics, Federal Science and Engineering Support to Universities, Colleges, and Nonprofit Institutions: FY 2000
Fed. Obligations for R&D – All Agencies
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Val
ue
(no
rmal
ized
to
1.0
0 in
199
5)
UNMC
All Institutions
Fed. Obligations for R&D - NIH
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Val
ue
(no
rmal
ized
to
1.0
0 in
199
5)
UNMC
All Institutions
Fed. Obligations for R&D - DoD
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
13.00
14.00
15.00
16.00
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Val
ue
(no
rmal
ized
to
1.0
0 in
199
5)
UNMC
All Institutions
Fed. Obligations for R&D - NSF
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Value (normalized to 1.00 in 1995)
UNMC
All Institutions
UNMC Federal Obligations for R&D
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
$ (T
ho
usa
nd
s) -
All
Oth
er A
gen
cies
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
$35,000
$ (T
ho
usa
nd
s) -
NIH
DOD
DOEd
HHS-CDCP
HHS-HRSA
HHS-Other
DOI
NASA
NSF
HHS-NIH
NIH (right axis)
DOE (left axis)
Summary Analysis (1993 – 2002) Overall Growth: UNMC overall federal R&D growth
outpaced growth across all institutions
NIH: UNMC federal R&D is dominated by NIH (85% - 95% of total)
DoD: UNMC shows sporadic peaks in DoD but no consistent growth despite DoD growth across all institutions
NSF: UNMC shows no consistent growth patterns at NSF
Comparison to Peer InstitutionsNormalized Total R&D Expenditures
(Total R&D Expenditures / FT graduate students)among institutions with similar numbers of graduate students
(2002 data)
$0.00
$0.20
$0.40
$0.60
$0.80
$1.00
U. Arkansas HealthScience Center
U. Nebraska MedicalCenter
Thomas Jefferson U. Medical U. South Carolina Rockefeller U.
$ (m
illio
n p
er F
T g
rad
uat
e st
ud
ent)
$45m
177
$71m
177
$103m
250
$132m
193
$167m
174
Comparison to Peer Institutions cont.Federally Financed Academic R&D Expenditures (2003)
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
MedicalCollege of
Ohio
U. NebraskaMedicalCenter
U. Arkansasfor MedicalSciences
Medical U.South
Carolina
U. TexasMedical
Branch atGalveston
Mount SinaniCollege ofMedicine
OregonHealth
SciencesUniversity
BaylorCollege ofMedicine
U. California-San
Francisco
$ (t
ho
usa
nd
s)
Conclusion
The Pot 'O Gold!Opportunities exist for UNMC at NSF, DoE, NASA, and other agencies
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
FY 06 NASA By The Numbers
Total: $16.4 billion (+ 1.3%) R&D: $11.5 billion (+ 7.3%) Science, Aeronautics, and Exploration (SAE):
$9.7 billion (+7.6%) Biological/Life Sciences: $500 million (est.)
Cuts to NASA’s Research Portfolio Aeronautics research portfolio:
- down 2.5 percent to $938 million Earth Sciences:
- down 7.3 percent to $2.1 billion Biological and Physical Sciences:
- down 13.6 percent to $799 million- NASA is dramatically restructuring and downsizing its
biological and physical sciences research portfolio into a Human Systems Research and Technology program more narrowly focused on research topics relevant to human space flight.
OBPR Enterprise Strategy
Five organizing questions are the basis for the Biological and Physical Research Enterprise Strategy:1. How can we assure the survival of humans traveling far from Earth? 2. How does life respond to gravity and space environments? 3. What new opportunities can research bring to expand understanding
of the laws of nature and enrich lives on Earth? 4. What technology must we create to enable the next explorers to go
beyond where we have been? 5. How can we educate and inspire the next generation to take the
journey?
Biological/Life Sciences Research
Estimated budget: $400 million in FY06 Supports safe human presence in space Research to control space flight risks to humans from
radiation, reduced gravity, and isolation Pursues fundamental biological questions from cell to
tissues to organisms to ecosystems which produce results that support
• Methods enabling human explorations of space;• Understanding of biological systems; and• Improving human health on Earth
Fundamental Space Biology Division
Goals: Use microgravity and other space effects to enhance
understanding of biological processes Develop foundation of biological knowledge
Research Elements: Molecular structures and physical interactions,
Molecular biology, Cell biology, Evolutionary biology, Gravitational biology, Developmental biology, Organismal and comparative biology
Bioastronautics Research DivisionGoals: Set priorities for issues related to flight crew health and med.
technology, and fundamental and applied research Sponsor research to address flight medical safety and performance
issues Integrate science and medical research
Research Elements: Space Biomedical Research Areas: Biomedical physiology,
Behavior and performance, Group dynamics, Radiobiology, Space and human factors engineering, Space medicine, Flight crew health care delivery and systems, Human clinical and space medical research
Spacecraft Habitability, Planetary Habitat, Environmental Health, and Space Systems Technology: Advanced life support, Toxicology, microbiology, Advanced EVA , Radiation protection, Bioplex
This division also manages the National Space Biomedical Research Institute: Countermeasures development
Office of Health and Medical Systems
Dr. Richard S. Williams BiographySpace and Life Sciences Directorate
Bioethics and Transition to Practice Division
Mission for Health Care The Chief Health and Medical Officer assists the Administrator to ensure the health and safety of NASA employees in space and on the ground.
The Chief Health and Medical Officer also monitors human and animal research and clinical practice.
Department of Energy
DoE FY 2006 Budget Final DOE budget at $8.7 billion for R&D
activities, a slight increase of 0.9 percent DOE’s Office of Science receives a modest
0.6 percent increase in its R&D portfolio to $3.4 billion includes $130 million in congressional earmarks and a boost in computing research.
DOE Organizational Chart
DoE Office of Science Flat budget for the last decade Director’s mission is to secure additional funding andsupport Primary source of support for the Physical Sciences
42% of federal support to physical sciences Primary support to: high energy physics, nuclear physics,
nuclear medicine, heavy element chemistry, plasma physics, and magnetic fusion, and catalysis
Manages multidisciplinary science programs Directly supports 23, 400 Ph.D.s, Post Docs, and Graduate
students Constructs and operates large scientific facilities
Office of Science’s Biological and Environmental Research (BER) Program Advancing environmental and biomedical knowledge Supports fundamental research in:
Climate change Environmental remediation Genomics Systems biology Radiation biology Medical Sciences
Supports leading edge research facilities across a range of disciplines Coordinates research across all programs
Biological and Environmental Research (BER) Long-Term Goals
Life Sciences:Life Sciences: Characterize the multi protein complexes involving a scientifically
significant fraction of a microbe’s proteins. Develop computational models to direct the use and design of
microbial communities to clean up waste, sequester carbon, or produce hydrogen
Medical Applications and Measurement Science:Medical Applications and Measurement Science: Develop intelligent biomimetic electronics that can both sense
and correctly stimulate the nervous system
Office of Science’s Biological and Environmental Research (BER) Staff
Dr. Aristides Partinos, Associate Director, BERand Acting Director, Life Sciences Division
301-903-5051 [email protected]
Dr. Mike Viola, Director, Medical SciencesDivision
301-903-0567 [email protected]
Office of Science’s Biological and Environmental Research (BER) Merit Review System
All projects undergo regular peer review and evaluation
Provides independent assessment of scientific and/or technical merit of the research
Basic Review Standards Sufficient technical/scientific content and merit Completeness Program policy and priorities
Summary: Trends in Federal R&D over the Last Decade
Big science has hit the life sciences All scientific fields are now clearly inter-dependent No longer such a thing as “disciplinary science” Technology is now driving science, more than the
reverse Significant increases in new term not likely
The Implementation Group, Inc.101 Constitution Avenue, NW
Suite 650 EastWashington, DC 20001
202.639.0671 – tel202.639.0713 – fax
