| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
* Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, Bethesda, Maryland, USA; and
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York, USA and The Wadsworth Center, New York State Department of Health, Albany, New York, USA
1Correspondence: E-mail: hgarrison{at}faseb.org
INVESTMENT IN THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH (NIH) has paid significant dividends to the American people, as NIH Director Elias Zerhouni noted in his testimony before Congress this spring (1)
. While the benefits to date have been impressive, the most dramatic and valuable returns on our investment are yet to come. However, a potential stumbling block to our continued success and international leadership is our inability to ensure that a new generation of scientists has the resources needed to carry on the work that has already been started. While scientific opportunities have never been greater and the numbers of grant applications has been rising steadily, success rates for R01 applications from new investigators have dropped to a new low of 16.8% in 2004. If other indicators are used, for example "paylines" (the cutoff score in any one review cycle), then the chance of being funded on any given grant application may be well below 10%. This is an alarming deterrent for any young person considering a career in biomedical research.
Prospects for correcting or reversing this situation are shrinking. Inflation is eroding the purchasing power of the flat NIH budgets, and competition among experienced investigators is at an all-time high. Without funding increases in FY2006, conditions will become even worse.
It is hard to measure opportunity in science or to assess its change over time. But one indicator that can be quantified is the number of applications for research grants. Applications for NIH Research Project Grants (RPGs) rose from 25,224 in 1995 to 34,710 in 2003, the final year of the five year doubling of the NIH budget (2)
. In 2004 and 2005, NIH’s budget remained flat while scientific opportunities in biomedicine continued to increase. By 2004 and 2005, the number of RPG applications rose to 43,069, an increase of 24% over a two year period. As a result of "no-growth" budgets and obligations to ongoing projects and programs, however, NIH was able to fund fewer new grants during these two years, and overall success rates fell from 29.9% in 2003 to 22.3% in 2005.
Scientific opportunities have continued to expand, but funding opportunities at NIH have not. This situation is especially hard on investigators beginning their research careers. While they are the most critical component of our continued leadership in science and innovation, they are the most vulnerable group when it comes to fluctuations and downturns in funding. They may encounter more lucrative career options in other fields of endeavor and, in many cases, options for scientific careers in other nations. As a result, their career choices are very sensitive to research funding opportunities. Many have made and will continue to make sacrifices for the chance to work in science, but as the barriers to research careers grow higher these altruistic decisions are severely challenged and may no longer be sustainable.
Not only are new investigators the most fragile component of the research enterprise, they have also been hit hardest by the increased competition for research funding. This situation is particularly alarming in the case of R01 grants. In fiscal years 1995 and 1996 there were just over 1300 "new" (type 1) R01 grants awarded to previously unfunded scientists, those individuals seeking their first R01 grants from NIH (Fig. 1
). After a sizeable increase to 1420 in 1997, the number of R01 grants awarded to previously unfunded scientists grew at a more modest rate (about 50 awards per year) over the course of the next three years, reaching 1573 awards in 2000. Since then, with the sole exception of fiscal year 2003, the number of R01 awards to previously unfunded scientists has remained at or below the fiscal year 2000 level. Thus, while opportunities in science have continued to increase, awards to new investigators have not. In fiscal year 2004, there were only 1541 new R01 awards to new investigators, the lowest number since fiscal year 1999.
|
Despite the tremendous benefits gained from our nation’s investment in biomedical research, we are facing a crisis in funding for the next generation of scientists. These individuals are an essential national resource, yet each year only 1500 R01 awards go to previously unfunded scientists.
Drawing on the recommendations of the National Academies (3)
, NIH has created a new program to facilitate and accelerate the careers of young scientists. The new "Pathways to Independence Grant" will provide resources for postdocs to transition into independent faculty positions. As the Director of NIH stated in announcing this new award, "We must invest in the future of our new scientists today if we expect to meet the nation’s health challenges of tomorrow" (4)
.
New initiatives like the "Pathways to Independence Grant" are essential to our continued progress in medical research, but if this program comes at the expense of funding for R01 research grants, then the new investigators will still be adversely affected. They will advance to the next stage in their career only to encounter another roadblock in the form of fewer research grants. To maintain our progress in biomedical research and continue to reap the benefits it has brought us, NIH needs the resources to establish innovative programs, such as those to train the next generation of scientists. Assuring a vital research workforce for the future is imperative for the health of our nation. Proposals to cut the NIH budget (5)
will undermine these initiatives and will severely compromise existing programs that have fueled so much progress in the battle against disease. Increased costs for medical research are already eroding purchasing power and forcing cutbacks; without additional resources, every innovation will require sacrificing important, ongoing work.
|
REFERENCES
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. J. Heinig, J. Y. Krakower, H. B. Dickler, and D. Korn Sustaining the Engine of U.S. Biomedical Discovery N. Engl. J. Med., September 6, 2007; 357(10): 1042 - 1047. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
