nih

A significant majority of SBIR and STTR grants awarded to small businesses from the National Institutes of Health in any given year end up in just a handful of states. For example, the percentage of all 2017 SBIR/STTR awards made to companies in the 23 states and Puerto Rico eligible to participate for funding from NIH’s Institutional Development Award (IDeA) program was only 8 percent – 97 of the 1,218 awards made across all phases of both innovation funding programs.  For comparison, the same states account for 15.8 percent of the estimated U.S. population in 2017. NIH wants to change that discrepancy.

One of the best ways to measure the effectiveness of state programs intended to encourage the success of SBIR applications is the approval-rate of their submissions. Although this data has been historically unavailable across every federal agency, it is now accessible for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the second largest provider of SBIR/STTR awards, according to a 2018 Digest report. The NIH distributed $446.2 million in SBIR/STTR awards in 2017, with every state except North and South Dakota receiving an award. Although California and Massachusetts had the most successful SBIR/STTR applications in 2017, accounting for roughly one-third of the total when combined, neither state ranked among the top 10 in success rate. NIH SBIR/STTR applications in Oregon (29 percent success rate), Vermont (25 percent success rate), and Wisconsin (23 percent success rate) were the most likely to be approved over the ten-year period from 2008 to 2017. Each of these states, as well as many others with high success rates, offer assistance with proposals such as technical support programs and Phase 0 grants.

Congress is set to pass portions of the overall FY 2019 federal budget before the end of the current fiscal year, which has been rare over the last decade. To keep pace, SSTI will be running a series of FY 2019 budget updates. Part I is Energy and Water (including Regional Agencies), Legislative Branch, and Military Construction and Veterans Affairs. Part II is Defense with Labor and HHS, as well as a CR for the rest of the government through Dec. 7.

Approximately 30.2 percent of NIH-funded research studies produce false positive results that make those studies not replicable by other researchers, according to a recent study from researchers at Queensland University of Technology (AU). The authors of the study contend that the reproducibility crisis is driven by “publish or perish” incentives to increase the quantity of their papers at the cost of quality. They contend this publish or perish mentality is most prevalent at large, established “parent” labs (those with 50 or more NIH-funded papers). In these labs, established researchers, young researchers, and students are under pressure to publish their work leading to methodological and other process mistakes that create false positives and reduce reproducibility.

The White House Office of Management and Budget released Delivering Government Solutions in the 21st Century, a plan for reorganizing federal agencies. On topics related to innovation, the wide-ranging plan would make changes to education, workforce, economic development, small business and more. Some of the suggestions could advance with administrative actions only, while many will require congressional support. As with previous initial proposals from the administration, this document does not provide many of the details necessary to evaluate the real intention and opportunity of each proposal. The actual effects of implementation for many suggestions could range from reduced administrative overhead to funding reductions totaling billions of dollars, for example depending on the interpretation of “consolidate.” These four ideas from OMB have the greatest potential to impact support for innovation economies.

With final passage and signage pending at the time of publication, the federal budget for FY 2018 provides relatively strong support for innovation economies. The Regional Innovation Strategies program is funded at $21 million, MEP at $140 million and the National Science Foundation at $7.8 billion, increases for all organizations. Other notable innovation programs receiving at least level funding are SBA’s cluster and accelerator programs, DOE’s ARPA-E, NASA science and the National Institutes of Health. Numerous stakeholders weighed in with Congress to preserve these priorities over the administration’s FY 2018 request — and FY 2019 faces the same challenges.
 

Eligible small businesses who have not previously won an SBIR/STTR award from the NIH are able to apply for help through a pilot initiative, the Applicant Assistance Program (AAP). The primary goal of the AAP is to increase participation in the SBIR program by businesses that are owned or controlled by individuals who are traditionally underrepresented in the biomedical sciences. The pilot is aimed at helping small R&D businesses and individuals successfully apply for Phase I SBIR/STTR funding from the National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI).

In a report of FY 2011-2016 data, the National Science Foundation finds that rate of female participants in its currently-funded Engineering Research Centers (ERCs) may be higher than for overall engineering programs. Specifically, participation among female faculty is better by about seven percent, by about 15 percent among female undergraduates, and a more modest 1-2 percent increase among doctorate students. This seems to be a significant gain in a field in which male Ph.D.-holders outnumber women 6:1 (per NSF data for 2015).

With a focus on improving health, driving economic growth, and expanding the country’s research capacity, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world. Because of NIH’s central role in supporting science, technology, and innovation, a better understanding of the agency’s footprint may be helpful to the technology-based economic development practitioner community. This edition of Useful Stats utilizes data from NIH’s Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tool (RePORT) and covers each year from 2007 to 2016. The data does not include projects funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

After much criticism, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced that it will abandon the Grant Support Index (GSI) plan – a strategy to bolster NIH funding support for the next generation of researchers by placing limits on individual research funding which SSTI previously covered. Instead, NIH will launch the Next Generation Researchers Initiative (NGRI) that will allocate $1.1 billion over the next five years to support nearly 2,400 new grants for early and mid-career researchers whose grant proposals receive high scores, but fall short of receiving funds. At this time, however, there was no immediate promise of where that money would be found, according to an article in the The Chronicle of Higher Education.