The Advisory Committee to the NIH Director (ACD) is meeting on Thursday, June 14, and Friday, June 15, 2012. During this meeting, three working groups will present their final draft reports for the ACD’s consideration:
June 14:
- 1:00p .m. – ACD Working Group on the Biomedical Workforce
- 2:45 p.m. – ACD Working Group on Diversity in the Biomedical Research Workforce
June 15:
- 9:15 a.m. – ACD Working Group on Data and Informatics
The full meeting agenda can be viewed here: http://acd.od.nih.gov/agendas/06142012agenda.pdf
The meeting will be held on the NIH campus in Bethesda, MD, in Building 31, Room 6C6. The meeting will also be videocast at http://acd.od.nih.gov/.
RO1 during the time period included in the study, I see myself and other colleagues of color falling into a deep hole in the coming years, as the NIH budget shrinks
Although I was one of the people who actually got an RO1 during the time period included in the study, I see myself and other colleagues of color falling into a deep hole in the coming years, as the NIH budget shrinks.
This is a version of an email I sent to the advisory committee some months ago. I am disappointed by the final report.
Good Day. I have been directed by Walter T. Schaffer, Ph.D.
Senior Scientific Advisor for Extramural Research to relay to you some suggestions to support underrepresented minority scientists.
Unfortunately, the paper by Dr. Schaffer and his colleagues first and foremost will be interpreted to support the idea that scientists of African descent in the US are inherently and fundamentally inferior to their white counter parts. The second most likely interpretation is that there is some experimental flaw in that work that prevents coming to the correct conclusion that bias exists at every level in the NIH granting process. Although I was one of the people who actually got an RO1 during the time period included in the study, I see myself and other colleagues of color falling into a deep hole in the coming years, as the NIH budget shrinks.
Pre review, scientists of color do not get support or consideration when they speak to program people about putting together a grant, or get due consideration when RFAs are developed. During review, there is bias against the actual submission where, with the new format, there is a lot more snubbing of grants for capricious reasons cloaked in discussions of “significance” or “impact”. Moreover, I have myself sat on study sections where I was the focus of bias, and this meant not only rude and un-collegial behavior, but also a lot more “voting out of range” on grants I either supported or criticized. Even when I tried really hard to support good grants by people of color, I was thoroughly chastised in the discussion—I remember a particularly glaring example of an R15 grant- a grant that was intended to build science and research infrastructure at an HBCU. Finally, if a minority scientist is lucky enough to get a scored grant that is “on the bubble” there is little or no support from “program” to support the application in council.
I was very disappointed to learn that the focus of future study by the committee will be on whether or not “de-identifying” applications will increase the funding of minority investigators. This apparently comes from the attitude that the evidence presented did not show bias in the system. The first phase of the study will be to determine if “de-identifying” is possible. It is easy to see where things go from here. If “de-identifying” is not possible—then there is no answer and the NIH throws up its hand and says “oh well”.
if “de-identifying” is possible and shows a difference, then the move will be to uncover some flaw within the study; if “de-identifying” doesn’t work to improve funding,, then that will be interpreted to mean that bias does not exist. I think that examining “de-identifying” is only a very small part of the needed response at best and at worst is obfuscation. Moreover, the idea that minority scientists –or rather their applications- are un or underprepared is nothing more than an extension of the bias that minority scientists are just not as good. Studies to examine this will not help—but they will create loads of work, positions, and data to examine-all at taxpayer expense.
I have the following suggestions, based on the hypotheses that 1) bias does exist 2) having a large number of well –funded scientists and physician-scientists of color positively decreases health disparities and further increases the mentoring and generation of future diversity in the biomedical science work force 3) there exists a need to quickly and efficiently increase the current funding shortfall:
1. Reconsider all requests for ARRA funding by underrepresented minority scientists—this includes administrative requests to program and other officers.
2. Extend 1 year of funding to minority investigators who have served as permanent members of study sections.
3. Generate a permanent NCRR/INBRE-like program for individual investigator-generated RO1s.
4. Submit all grants submitted in the past year and henceforth from minority investigators to secondary review by special emphasis panel—review should be limited to the research plan- like any other study section, the top grants in the group should be funded.
5. All grants by minority investigators that are likely to be within 8 percentile points of the pay line should be presented and reviewed in Council meetings by each institute. Funding should be strongly considered in consultation with other institutes and the office of the Director.
Any info on the results of group meeting? Would love to learn about the progress and further plans regarding ACD.
What is the line up looking like? Just like the top comment says, I know myself I have been waiting for awhile to hear what Dr. Collins has to say in regards to the Stem Cells Redefinition as well.
Are we going to finally hear something from Dr. Collins about the Stem Cell Redefinition that has been been under review for 2 years? Some sort of explanation as to why he is holding back the science?
I’m a proponent for diversity in the workforce being that I’m an African American male studying Biomedical Science. I wonder if there will be any research grants available for students like me. Looking forward to watching the videocast.