NIH STATEMENT IN RESPONSE TO THE NAS REPORT: ADDRESSING THE NATION'S CHANGING
NEEDS FOR BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENTISTS
Release Date: March 22, 2001
NOTICE: NOT-OD-01-027
National Institutes of Health
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has analyzed the recently
issued report from the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), Addressing
the Nation's Changing Needs for Biomedical and Behavioral Scientists
and has prepared a statement that describes NIH intentions to implement
selected recommendations. The NIH offers the statement below for
comment in order to determine the views of the extramural community
prior to implementation. The original NAS report can be found at
http://grants.nih.gov/training/outcomes.htm.
Please post all comments to the email address: PersonnelNeeds@od.nih.gov.
Comments must be received on or before April 30, 2001.
Email Address for Comments: PersonnelNeeds@od.nih.gov
Additional inquiries may be directed to:
Walter Schaffer, Ph.D.
NIH Research Training Officer
Office of Extramural Research
6701 Rockledge Drive, Rm. 6184
Bethesda, MD 20892-7911
301-435-2687
Email: schaffew@nih.gov
NIH Statement in Response to the NAS Report: Addressing the Nation’s
Changing Needs for Biomedical and Behavioral Scientists
The NIH would like to thank the National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
Personnel Needs Committee for the report Addressing the Nation’s
Changing Needs for Biomedical and Behavioral Scientists. Copies can be
found at http://grants.nih.gov/training/outcomes.htm. This report
provides an insightful analysis of the training environment experienced
by health-related graduate students and individuals in postdoctoral
training. Additionally, the report offers a number of useful
recommendations designed to improve the nature of graduate and
postdoctoral training to more appropriately meet future needs.
With the following statement, the NIH addresses its intention to
support and implement selected recommendations from the Biomedical and
Crosscutting sections of this report. Other sections of the report may
be addressed in subsequent statements. We include here plans that
encompass the funding of the National Research Service Award (NRSA)
training grants and fellowships as well as students and postdoctorates
supported by NIH funded research grants. This statement also describes
areas in which NIH plans depart from the findings and recommendations
of the NAS Committee. We hope that the statement will encourage a
broad discussion within the scientific community and will inform the
next quadrennial study of research personnel needs.
Within Addressing the Nation’s Needs, the Committee describes a life-
sciences enterprise that is highly productive but is dependent on
graduate students and postdoctorates for much of the day-to-day work of
research. The Committee concludes that current levels of research
training may be higher than necessary to maintain the biomedical
workforce. They encourage the development of a more permanent
laboratory workforce and at the same time they caution against a broad
reduction in PhD production that might delay or disrupt research
progress. The NIH generally supports these observations, but differs
somewhat from the Committee’s approach for systematic improvement. The
specific recommendations from the report are laid out below along with
the NIH position and a specific plan for implementation.
BIOMEDICAL
Recommendation 2-1. There should be no growth in the aggregate number
of Ph.D.s awarded in the basic biomedical sciences.
The Committee used a life-table model of the biomedical workforce (see
Appendix D of the NAS Report) to describe the expected replacement and
expansion demand for biomedical scientists over the next several
years. The model predicts that between 1,571 and 3,031 new biomedical
PhDs will be needed each year to meet employment demands by the year
2005. This compares to a current annual biomedical PhD output that is
close to 5,400. In spite of the fact that the Committee believed there
is a substantial overproduction of biomedical PhDs, it recommended
continuance of current production rates to avoid disruption of research
progress. While the NIH agrees that there is no rationale for growth
in the number of PhDs in the basic biomedical sciences, we are less
convinced of the need to take any specific steps to curtail the entry
of students into science.
The Committee observed a tension between an apparent overproduction and
the need to keep a successful enterprise functioning. We also would
like to emphasize the uncertainties in predicting future growth and
needs in specific fields. There are concerns about the reliability of
replacement needs calculated using existing workforce models. Such
limitations must be taken in context as we face an explosion in post-
genomic sciences and an expansion of linkages between biology and the
allied disciplines. Emergence of a new era of biological inquiry
imposes even greater uncertainties on future projections and suggests
that requirements for highly trained scientists are unlikely to
decline. Uncertainties about future demands for researchers also must
be considered in light of recent reports indicating stability or
contraction of graduate enrollments (see
http://grants.nih.gov/training/GSS1999/GSS.html) and PhD production
rates (see http://www.norc.uchicago.edu/studies/sed/sed1999.htm) in
biomedical sciences.
The second point is that the NIH is not in a position to control
graduate enrollments. The NIH supports only about 30% of all biomedical
graduate students at any point in time considering both NRSA and
research grants. Although the NIH provides substantial support for
graduate training, responsibility for enrollments will continue to
reside with the universities. We believe universities should continue
to select individual students based on their prospects for scientific
contribution. They should retain the ability to increase enrollments
in emerging or expanding scientific fields and to reduce enrollments in
fields that appear to be contracting. Some universities have been
guided in this process by analyzing the career outcomes of former
students and postdoctoral trainees. This type of information also has
been used effectively to inform and shape the career expectations of
prospective and current students. We encourage all schools to take a
broad view of the likely placements of their students and provide
appropriate career advice.
Recommendation 2-2. Support for NRSA training grants and fellowships
at the predoctoral and postdoctoral levels should be gradually
increased. At the predoctoral levels, the NIH should seek to provide
at least 50 percent of its research training support through training
grants and fellowships.
This recommendation was based on the assumption that by managing the
numbers on research grants and training grants, the support for
students could be stabilized at current levels. However, this is not
consistent with the functions of these mechanisms. Training grants are
not used as a generic mechanism for graduate student support. Their
primary purpose is to stimulate and encourage specific programmatic
goals by supporting only the best institutions and the best students.
Research grants are used to award support for research projects, and
that support is provided with a maximum degree of flexibility. We
believe that attempts to manipulate these mechanisms for the purpose of
controlling Ph.D. numbers would run counter to their primary purposes.
The recommendation to shift student support from research grants to
training grants also derives from a recent, as yet unpublished, report
that shows that recipients of at least nine months of NRSA research
training support are more likely to attain a faculty appointment and
are more likely to apply for and receive an NIH research grant than
their colleagues without NRSA support. We believe that training grants
offer optimal developmental experiences for the early years of graduate
research training. But, part of the relative success of NRSA
recipients is almost certainly related to the fact that training
program directors are motivated by a stringent review process to select
the best students for appointment to the grant.
We agree that universities should ensure that all individuals in
graduate and postdoctoral training have access to appropriate training
and career development information and opportunities, that a faculty
committee frequently monitors training progress, and that there are
effective means for resolving grievances. Many of these principles
have been effectively described in two recent reports: At Cross
Purposes: What the experiences of today's doctoral students reveal
about doctoral education (http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/phd-survey/) and
Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers
(http://www.nap.edu/books/0309069963/html/). Further, the NIH
recognizes that institutions differ in terms of access to institutional
funds to support students early in graduate training. Nevertheless, we
believe that as a general rule, recently enrolled graduate students
should not be immediately supported on research grants, but should be
permitted and encouraged to attend classes and engage in rotations
prior to selection of a dissertation subject.
We also believe that universities should try to constrain the duration
of both graduate and postdoctoral training. The NIH supports the
concept that federal funding from any combination of NRSA and/or
research grants should not exceed six years for graduate training and
five years for postdoctoral training. Universities should consider
conversion of all individuals in postdoctoral training to staff or
faculty appointments at the earliest possible opportunity. Certainly,
by five years of postdoctoral training experience, training should be
completed and individuals who are being retained at the institution
should be converted to non-training positions that provide appropriate
levels of income and a benefit package that includes such items as
retirement, leave, and health insurance. The increased costs
associated with such positions have been and will continue to be
allowable under NIH research grants. Principal Investigators are
encouraged to build such costs into the budget request for future
competing grants.
Recommendation 2-3. The NIH should consider at least a small increase
in dual-degree training in the basic biomedical sciences.
The NIH supports a small increase in our contribution to the support
available for MD/PhD, DDS/PhD, RN/PhD and other forms of dual degree
training.
Recommendation 2-4. The NIH should expand its emphasis on
multidisciplinary training in the basic biomedical sciences.
As the Committee points out, a multidisciplinary and multi-departmental
approach has been a hallmark of NRSA supported training. We agree with
the Committee that all entering graduate students should be educated
and trained in an environment that will allow them to collaborate
effectively with investigators in other fields.
Recommendation 2-5. The NIH should increase its efforts to identify
and support programs that encourage and prepare underrepresented
minority students for careers in basic biomedical research.
We agree with the Committee that gains in the participation of
individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups in the
biomedical sciences have been very slow in spite of decades of intense
NIH effort. Although some of the NIH minority programs have recently
been evaluated, we agree that the current array of NIH minority
programs should also be reviewed. We also agree that the continuing
underrepresentation probably stems from restricted educational
opportunities far earlier in the educational career of minority
students. The NIH supports the concept of improving the quality of
elementary and secondary education for all students, but notes that the
responsibility for this effort is very clearly within the purview of
other federal agencies such as the Department of Education and the
National Science Foundation.
CROSSCUTTING ISSUES
Recommendation 5-1. Led by the NIH, the agencies with responsibility
for health research training should strengthen their efforts to ensure
diversity in the research laborforce.
See response to Recommendation 2-5.
Recommendation 5-2. The NIH, AHRQ, and HRSA should encourage research
training programs to expose participants of all backgrounds to issues
associated with economic, cultural, and ethnic disparities in health.
The NIH has recently issued a statement about health disparities that
is available at http://www.nih.gov/about/hd/strategicplan.pdf. This
document describes the nature of such disparities and offers a
comprehensive plan to address these issues. One aspect of this plan
involves training and supporting new investigators who are interested
in exploring the pathophysiology related to disparities in health. To
explore this approach, the NIH recently launched the NIH Academy, which
is completely dedicated to training in the area of health disparities.
This program is described at
http://www.training.nih.gov/student/Pre-IRTA/previewpostbac.asp?AppType=academy.
Recommendation 5-3. The NIH, AHRQ, and HRSA should consolidate their
oversight of research training and training related activities and
thereby shape and manage the workforce as envisioned by Congress when
it established the NRSA program.
The Committee refers to the following forms of oversight of the
training related activities in the biomedical sciences:
o Tracking predoctoral and postdoctoral research assistants and
associates in the same way that the NIH tracks NRSA recipients.
o Gather more complete information on students and postdoctorates
supported by the NIH in terms of the number supported, their levels of
income, field of training, and prior education.
o Analyze the workforce by linking information on recipients of NIH
training support to other national databases.
o Analyze labor market trends more frequently than is afforded by the
quadrennial NAS studies of research personnel needs.
The NIH supports these recommendations. NRSA recipients are currently
tracked and their career outcomes are periodically studied as a means
of evaluating the effectiveness of these training programs. One
component of that process involves linking NIH information with
databases managed by the National Science Foundation, the Association
of American Medical Colleges, the Institute for Scientific Information,
and other sources. We also support the concept of collecting
identifying information on graduate and postdoctoral trainees supported
by research grants. Such data collection should begin after a period
of public discussion and the development of a simple, web-based
information collection module. Finally, we support the concept of
more frequent analyses of labor market information. We have
tentatively agreed with the NAS to make the quadrennial personnel needs
studies a more continuous process. In that way, NAS staff will be
available to consider mid-course corrections to labor-force models and
to incorporate information from the biennial updates of the NSF/NIH
Survey of Doctoral Recipients. This information will be provided to
the NIH and future NAS Personnel Needs Committees on a more regular
basis.
Recommendation 5-4. Stipends and other forms of compensation for those
in training should be based on education and experience and should be
regularly adjusted to reflect changes in the cost of living.
The NIH concurs with the committee’s observation that NRSA stipends are
unduly low in view of the high level of education and professional
skills involved in biomedical research. NRSA stipend targets have been
identified for both predoctoral and postdoctoral recipients. NIH plans
to develop budget requests that will permit an increase in stipends by
10 to 12 percent per year for the next few years in order to reach
those targets. Once the targets have been attained, annual cost-of-
living adjustments will be instituted so that stipend levels remain
relatively constant in real value. The appropriateness of stipend
levels will be examined in future years to maintain comparability to
levels of income available to students and postdoctorates from other
sources.
Recommendation 5-5. The NIH and other federal science agencies that
support research training should articulate clear goals regarding the
education of foreign students and should modify their grant policies
where necessary.
The NIH concurs with this recommendation and reiterates the importance
of funding opportunities for international students and
postdoctorates. The presence of foreign students and postdoctoral
fellows provides important benefits to the individual, the United
States, the nation of origin, and the larger scientific community.
This type of international exchange facilitates scientific advances
that better help prevent, treat, and control diseases in both the US
and the world population. When foreign researchers return to their own
nations with state-of-the-science knowledge, advanced techniques, and
research skills, they serve as crucial international collaborators in
the design and conduct of ongoing research programs. Support for
foreign students and postdoctoral trainees permits the conduct of
multi-national natural history and epidemiology studies, international
clinical trials of drugs and vaccines, as well as basic biomedical and
behavioral research. The continued support of foreign students and
postdoctoral trainees with NIH research grants is essential. It is
also important for the NIH to develop the means to monitor and track
these students so that we have a better understanding of their numbers,
their countries of origin, and their fields of study. We should also
seek to ensure that the training experiences of international students
and postdoctoral trainees are equivalent in quality to those offered to
their domestic counterparts.
SUMMARY OF PLANS TO IMPLEMENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE NAS REPORT
The following is a summary of NIH positions on the recommendations and
plans for implementation.
o The NIH supports the concept that all entering graduate students
(domestic and foreign) should receive a broad, multidisciplinary
education and an opportunity to rotate through several different
laboratories prior to selection of a dissertation project.
o The NIH supports the concept that universities should encourage the
earliest possible completion of graduate and postdoctoral education and
training. To foster this objective, the NIH proposes to limit the use
of federal dollars from any source for the support of graduate training
that exceeds six years and postdoctoral training that exceeds five
years.
o The NIH supports the concept that postdoctoral trainees should be
converted to non-training staff or faculty positions at the earliest
practical opportunity. Individuals in such positions should receive
appropriate levels of income and benefits. These costs are allowable
under NIH research grants. Such costs should be built into future
competing applications.
o The NIH will continue to support a wide variety of education and
training programs designed to increase the racial and ethnic diversity
of the biomedical laborforce and will continue to devote effort to the
issue of health disparities.
o The NIH supports the concept that labor market analysis should be
carried out more frequently than once every four years as currently
required by law. We announce our intention to make the data collection
and analysis of workforce data a more continuous process.
o The NIH supports the continued funding of research training
opportunities for graduate students and postdoctorates from foreign
countries. The NIH endorses the recommendation that the training
environment and the level of support for international students and
postdoctoral trainees should be identical to that offered to domestic
students and postdoctoral trainees
o The NIH supports the idea of tracking graduate students and
postdoctoral trainees supported by research grants. A web-based data
collection strategy that is both easy to use and reliable will be
designed. This information will provide information about the number
of students and postdoctoral trainees supported by the NIH and will be
used in future evaluation studies.
o The NIH supports higher stipends for NRSA recipients and therefore
announces tentative targets of $25,000 for graduate and $45,000 for
entry-level postdoctoral stipends. Future budget requests will
incorporate 10 to 12 percent stipend increases until these targets are
reached. After attainment of these targets, the real value of stipends
will be maintained with annual cost-of-living adjustments.
o The NIH will align the philosophy of limited training periods with
stipends paid to pre- and postdoctoral trainees. For example,
graduations in the NRSA postdoctoral stipend scale could be
discontinued after 5 years (see
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-01-011.html).
The NIH will attempt to gain a clearer picture of the impact of such a
policy before final implementation.
Weekly TOC for this Announcement
NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices
|
|
|
|
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
|
|
|
|
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health®
|