 |
Report from the NIGMS Committee Examining Possible Update
of the MBRS SCORE Program
Mission
The mission of the Minority Biomedical Research Support
(MBRS) Program of NIGMS is "to increase the numbers
of minority faculty, students, and investigators engaged
in biomedical research and to broaden the opportunities for
participation in biomedical research of minority faculty,
students, and investigators, by providing general support for
biomedical research programs at eligible institutions." In
1996-1997 and following the creation of the MORE Division, the
MBRS programs were revamped into the current Support of
Continuous Research Excellence (SCORE), Research Initiative
for Scientific Enhancement (RISE), and Initiative for Minority
Student Development (IMSD). Although these revisions improved
program accountability and separated research funding from
student development, they were not fully upgraded to meet the
changing needs of the national biomedical research endeavor
and the variety of minority-serving institutions (MSI) that
are eligible for MBRS support.
The current SCORE Program resembles the original MBRS
research program in that it supports meritorious,
investigator-initiated research projects from a wide range of
scientific disciplines submitted as part of a program
project. The number of subprojects may range from 1 to
28 subprojects and pilot projects per grant, and eligible
institutions vary considerably in size, resources and research
capabilities from small, non-research intensive ones to very
large, research-intensive ones. Given this diversity in
the SCORE Program, it is important to periodically examine it
and seek ways by which the program structure and management
might be modified to most effectively serve the changing
research development needs of the varied participant
institutions and the individual research investigators.
This is the goal of the current assessment of the structure
and management of the MBRS SCORE mechanism by NIGMS.
The re-examination of the SCORE Program was done by an
internal committee with representation from the scientific
divisions, scientific review office, grants management, and
budget office at NIGMS. The re-examination of the SCORE
Program was performed with the goal of making recommendations
for upgrading the program to:
- increase access of MSI investigators to the scientific
and administrative resources at NIGMS and categorical
institutes of NIH and ultimately to increase the number of
investigators at MSI involved in biomedical research, and
- enhance their potential to access the more extensive
research support available from non-MBRS sources, thereby
increasing the biomedical research capabilities of
MSI.
The above major goal was approached with three aims in
mind and taking into consideration the Congressional mandate
for MBRS:
- To provide a centralized support mechanism that offers
program directors greater opportunities to focus their
efforts on more global development of research potential at
their institutions. This mechanism would seek the
enhancement of the institutional research environment and
infrastructure to facilitate the research efforts of
individual investigators.
- To devise types of funding mechanisms that are better
suited to the career development needs of investigators and
more sensitive to the differing levels of research intensity
at the varied MSI. This would include support for
development of initial research endeavors, support for lower
intensity but highly competitive projects that maintain
and/or enhance the institutional research environment, and
where appropriate, support for larger, more intensive
research projects to provide MSI investigators with an
opportunity to develop research programs that can compete
for support from non-MORE sources.
- To provide individual MBRS investigators with review
feedback and the opportunity to interact directly with
appropriate program staff having scientific expertise most
relevant to their research.
Recommendations of the Committee
To achieve the above goals, the general approach
recommended is to replace the current single application with
an institutional/administrative application prepared by a
program director and three types of research applications that
can be submitted separately by individual investigators. This
uncoupling of the SCORE components would allow the program
director to focus on and provide vision for development of the
global institutional research effort and the principal
investigators of the subprojects to independently pursue and
develop their research programs and interact directly with
NIGMS/NIH scientific staff. The committee’s specific
recommendations are presented in more detail below.
I.
Grant Mechanisms
A. Institutional Research
Development and Support Program:
S06
B. Investigator-Initiated
Research Projects: S01, S15, and S03
II.
Interaction with NIGMS and other NIH Program Staff
I. Grant Mechanisms
A. Institutional Research Development
and Support Program: S06
The program director of the Institutional
Research Development and Support Program will
develop and implement a global institutional plan aimed at
future development as well as maintenance of the research
infrastructure and environment in support of the individual
researchers at the home institution. The plan must have
measurable objectives that will be coupled with an evaluation
program to measure the success of the program in meeting its
goals.
The S06 or the Institutional Research Development and
Support Program must build on the research capabilities of the
institution and be designed to enhance and serve the needs of
the research community at the institution. In developing
institutional goals, the program director must be cognizant of
available resources and needs, as well as the research efforts
and potential of the faculty members at the institution.
Measures of progress in reaching goals and achievements, and
plans for the future of the program would be important aspects
of this component as well as the view of how this component
fits into the overall institutional effort to enhance research
capabilities. A degree of innovation would be one important
criterion for this component.
Responsibilities under this component could include
central administrative/financial management/clerical support
for the investigators. The program director should be the
institutional liaison to Federal funding agencies; become a
source of current information on research funding
opportunities, policies, and guidelines; and encourage and
facilitate potential investigators in seeking such support.
Other responsibilities for this component could include
scientific core facilities, shared equipment, internal and
external research seminars, and scientific and grant
preparation workshops/symposia. Additionally, in institutions
that lack a sponsored programs or grants/contracts office,
support for a grants manager could be provided. These
functions will have to be justified, and an explanation on how
they fit into the overall institutional internally- and
externally-funded research efforts will need to be provided.
Thus, the program director will have a key role in formulating
and managing the Institutional Research Development and
Support Program and will contribute to the development and
management of the institution’s overall research effort.
The S06 mechanism would be for a total of 4 years and
would be renewable. It would allow an institution to hold one
such award and this would be capped at $100,000, excluding
core equipment. Requests for core equipment must be highly
justified in the context of the institution’s development plan
and based on shared use.
Review Criteria for the S06 Institutional
Research Development and Support Program
For this award, the merit (vision, appropriateness,
quality of organization) of the proposed administration
(director/structure) and activities, and the plan for their
implementation and evaluation would be key review criteria.
Research projects/grants would be considered in a general
manner as to how well they are planned to fit into the overall
effort to implement, develop, and evaluate the institutional
plan for the research infrastructure/environment.
For renewals, key criteria will be progress accomplished
and how future plans utilize evaluation of past efforts in
proposing to continue to promote an intellectual research
environment for the institution and the investigators.
B. Investigator-Initiated Research Projects
This MBRS research component would allow each researcher
to submit an investigator-initiated research proposal directly
to NIH. To meet the varied needs of the MBRS community, three
types of research projects are suggested. They will be peer
reviewed by committees administered by the NIGMS Office of
Scientific Review. Applicants from eligible institutions could
submit grant applications for these S awards at any point, but
could apply for only one type of award in a round, and could
never have more than one S award at a time. Individual
submission of applications will allow investigators to more
directly interact with review and program staff. A bonus to
NIGMS will be a significant workload reduction especially
for review and grants management staff under this
arrangement and the possibility for improvements in the
efficiency of the review, program, and grants management
processes for MBRS grants.
- S01
This would be similar to an R01
application. This award would be for investigators with high
potential or established research programs seeking
sufficient support to develop nationally competitive
research projects and transition to non-MBRS research
support. The expectations in terms of scope and productivity
for this award would be similar to that for an R01.
Significant productivity and peer-reviewed publications
would be expected, and the research should develop to
compete nationally for non-MBRS sources of Federal and
foundation support. The S01 would be a 4-year award that
could be renewed once. The budget request should be modular
in steps of $25,000 and similar in size to an average R01
award. The expectation for these awards is that within or by
the end of the 8 years of possible support, the
potential of the research program to receive non-MBRS
support would be evident based on grant submission and
review by the Center for Scientific Review or similar
research review groups.
Since the S01 award
would be limited to one renewal, interaction with
appropriate scientific staff is critical for investigators
to transition to non-MBRS support. Additionally, funding of
a first R01 application from an MBRS investigator may be an
area where NIGMS could set some specific priorities,
especially if the investigator’s potential to sustain
independent research is evident.
Review
Criteria for the S01 Award
The criteria would
be essentially the same used for R01 reviews, with the
addition of an assessment of how well the research is
planned and developed to allow for the transition to
non-MBRS support.
- S15
This would be a smaller fixed cost
award, similar to an AREA award. The expectations in terms
of scope and productivity for this award would be more
modest than the S01, and the aim for these awards is to
develop and maintain a research environment at the home
institution. This would be a 4-year renewable award for
investigators who desire to maintain a research program of
modest scope that fits better with available institutional
resources, their career status, and their teaching or other
institutional responsibilities. The award would be
$50,000/year. The applicant should provide a clear rationale
for seeking this type of award. The continuation of the
project would depend on an appropriate degree of
productivity (peer-reviewed publications) and that the
research evolves and remains current and significant.
In general, the committee believed that, as
proposed, the S15 mechanism is sufficient and would meet the
very important aim of developing and contributing to
maintenance of a research-oriented environment and community
at the home institution that could benefit student training.
However, it offers no strong incentive for the S15
investigator to seek non-MBRS research support. If such an
incentive is deemed to be the dominant goal for all MBRS
research support, then an alternative approach could be to
limit the lifetime of the S15; e.g., it could be renewed
only once, and the expectation would be that the
investigators seek non-MBRS support.
Review
Criteria for the S15 Award
The review criteria
for the S15 application would be similar to those for an
R01, but the expectations for scope and productivity would
be adjusted to the smaller scale of the project similar to
the review of AREA grants. Continued support would require
productivity, some level of peer-reviewed publication, and
continued development of research that is well designed,
current, and scientifically significant.
- S03
The smallest mechanism would be a
two-year, non-renewable, fixed-cost award for pilot projects
($35,000/year) that have limited focused goals. These awards
would be for gathering preliminary data and establishing
proof of feasibility for new projects. The expectation is
that based on the results of 2 years of study, a
successful pilot project would provide the foundation for
submission of a more substantial research application either
to NIH or other funding source.
Review
Criteria for the S03 Award
The S03 application
will be evaluated using the usual NIH review criteria, but
the focus will be on the merit of the problem and the
feasibility of the approach in terms of providing limited,
but critical and clear data that would lead to establishment
of a research program.
II. Interaction with NIGMS and other NIH Program
Staff
The basis for the recommendations offered below is that
the professional growth of the S01 investigators would benefit
most from interactions with NIGMS program staff having
appropriate expertise. The other grant mechanisms, such as the
institutional award, S15, and S03, could be best managed by
MORE staff.
S01 applications, being the most research intensive and
aimed at gaining access to non-MORE support, would be assigned
to NIGMS program staff based on scientific expertise. A MORE
program staff member would also be assigned to provide
advice/assistance more specific to SCORE program issues.
For the S15 and S03 grants, non-MORE program staff could
serve as scientific advisors or consultants on an as-needed
basis to the MORE personnel. Program staff would identify
areas of scientific expertise where they could be available in
varied levels of advisory capacity to MORE program directors
and to MBRS applicants/grantees. In this regard their
scientific expertise may be wider than that used for their
usual program responsibilities.
The scope of the MBRS applications needs to be refocused
to reflect the biomedical and behavioral areas of interest to
NIH. This would avoid the need for the search of “outside
advisors” from other agencies for projects in scientific areas
outside of NIH program staff expertise.
Grants transferable to other NIH categorical institutes
may need to be limited to the S01 mechanism. Once they are
transferred, NIGMS would no longer take responsibility for
grant funding, scientific administration, or subsequent
review, thus eliminating the need for a co-funding process.
Again this offers the opportunity for simplification of MBRS
funding processes.
NIGMS Committee Roster
Jean Chin, Ph.D., Division of Cell Biology and
Biophysics
Anthony Carter, Ph.D., Division of Genetics and
Developmental
Biology
Alison Cole, Ph.D., Division of Pharmacology, Physiology,
and Biological Chemistry
Antoinette Holland, Grants Management Office
Nancy Vess, Budget Office
Paula Kuykendall Powell, Budget Office
Ann Hagan, Ph.D., Division of Extramural Activities
Shiva Singh, Ph.D., Office of Scientific Review
Arthur Zachary, Ph.D., Office of Scientific
Review
|
|
