NIH Funding of COVID-19 Research in 2020: a Cross Sectional Study

ObjectiveThis study aims to characterize and evaluate the NIH’s grant allocation pattern of COVID-19 research.DesignCross sectional studySettingCOVID-19 NIH RePORTER Dataset was used to identify COVID-19 relevant grants.Participants1,108 grants allocated to COVID-19 research.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was to determine the number of grants and funding amount the NIH allocated for COVID-19 by research type and clinical/scientific area. The secondary outcome was to calculate the time from the funding opportunity announcement to the award notice date.ResultsThe NIH awarded a total of 56,169 grants in 2020, of which 2.0% (n=1,108) were allocated for COVID-19 research. The NIH had a $42 billion budget that year, of which 5.3% ($2.2 billion) was allocated to COVID-19 research. The most common clinical/scientific areas were social determinants of health (n=278, 8.5% of COVID-19 funding), immunology (n=211, 25.8%), and pharmaceutical interventions research (n=208, 47.6%). There were 104 grants studying COVID-19 non-pharmaceutical interventions, of which 2 grants studied the efficacy of face masks and 6 studied the efficacy of social distancing. Of the 83 COVID-19 funded grants on transmission, 5 were awarded to study airborne transmission of COVID-19, and 2 grants on transmission of COVID-19 in schools. The average time from the funding opportunity announcement to the award notice date was 151 days (SD: ±57.9).ConclusionIn the first year of the pandemic, the NIH diverted a small fraction of its budget to COVID-19 research. Future health emergencies will require research funding to pivot in a timely fashion and funding levels to be proportional to the anticipated burden of disease in the population.

Embedded Librarians to Support Data Management Needs of a Multidisciplinary Research Program

<p>This presentation describes the establishment of a partnership between the Libraries and a multidisciplinary research program, and some of the products and outcomes from immersive and embedded roles within that program. Several factors contributed to the development of this partnership: outreach efforts by the Engineering Library and the Data Services Librarian to faculty, staff, students, and research administrators; a research program director who has a history of engagement with the Libraries; and the funder’s data management and sharing mandates in the funding opportunity announcement for the research program.</p>

Systems epidemiology and cancer: A review of the National Institutes of Health extramural grant portfolio 2013–2018

Objectives Systems epidemiology approaches may lead to a better understanding of the complex and dynamic multi-level constellation of contributors to cancer risk and outcomes and help target interventions. This grant portfolio analysis aimed to describe the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) investments in systems epidemiology and to identify gaps in the cancer systems epidemiology portfolio. Methods The analysis examined grants funded (2013–2018) through seven NIH systems science Funding Opportunity Announcements (FOAs) as well as cancer-specific systems epidemiology grants funded by NCI during that same time. Study characteristics were extracted from the grant abstracts and specific aims and coded. Results Of the 137 grants awarded under the NIH FOAs, 52 (38%) included systems epidemiology. Only five (4%) were focused on cancer systems epidemiology. The NCI-wide search (N = 453 grants) identified 35 grants (8%) that included cancer systems epidemiology in their specific aims. Most of these grants examined epidemiology and surveillance-based questions (60%); fewer addressed clinical care or clinical trials (37%). Fifty-four percent looked at multiple scales within the individual (e.g., cell, tissue, organ), 49% looked beyond the individual (e.g., individual, community, population), and few (9%) included both. Across all grants examined, the systems epidemiology grants primarily focused on discovery or prediction, rather than on impacts of intervention or policy. Conclusions The most notable finding was that grants focused on cancer versus other diseases reflected a small percentage of the portfolio, highlighting the need to encourage more cancer systems epidemiology research. Opportunities include encouraging more multiscale research and continuing the support for broad examination of domains in these studies. Finally, the nascent discipline of systems epidemiology could benefit from the creation of standard terminology and definitions to guide future progress.

Hustling for Funding

This chapter focuses on the role of finance and the politics of collaboration, charting the development of the Digital Repository of Ireland (DRI). DRI have been beset with institutional politics concerning its framing, development, and operation. The future funding issue was just the latest example in a long list of fraught exchanges that could be traced back to its original conception and funding mechanism. The DRI was born out of a funding opportunity, but seemed destined to die due to a funding failure. Without a political solution, the data life cycle would turn full circle much more quickly than initially anticipated. Unless there is a means of covering the costs for labour, equipment and other essential inputs, data are not generated or stored, and thus cannot be used or shared. Even in open data projects, the data might be free to use but they were not free to create, or to process and host.

Impact-Driven Investing in New Mobility Enterprises: Perspectives from Kampala, Uganda, and Hyderabad, India

Private investments present a critical funding opportunity to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, due to the growing recognition that socially and environmentally responsible solutions can generate impacts and financial returns across the risk spectrum. Innovative new mobility solutions—especially when driven by impact-oriented investments and enabled by inclusive policies—can be part of the solution for sustainable and equitable transport. The research paper features key insights on impact-driven investments in new mobility enterprises in Kampala, Uganda, and Hyderabad, India. The paper highlights the current challenges to impact investing in mobility enterprises, including difficulties in accounting for impact, dilution of impact from other sectors, regulatory regimes and political risks that could hinder the running of mobility businesses, and entrenched stakeholders holding back investments. It concludes with opportunities to confront these challenges and pathways to safe, clean and inclusive transportation for vulnerable urban residents in the global south.

POLICY SERIES: THE HRSA GERIATRICS EDUCATION INITIATIVES: A POLICY AND PROGRAM UPDATE

This session will address the evolving work of Geriatric Workforce Enhancement Programs (GWEP) to educate and train the primary care workforce and partner with community based organizations to address gaps in healthcare. The inaugural GWEP awardees were announced at the 2015 White House Conference on Aging. In November 2018 the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), released the second GWEP Notice of Funding Opportunity (NoFO). The new funding opportunity reflects current policy priorities. In addition, for the first time in 9 years a Notice of Funding Opportunity was released for the Geriatric Academic Career Award (GACA) program. The return of the GACA program indicates the success of advocacy efforts to increase programs to support geriatric training and the development of geriatric academic professionals. Individual symposiums will explore the policy priorities reflected in the GWEP NoFO including the use of technology for training and care delivery, the age-friendly healthcare and dementia-friendly community initiatives, and value-based care including improving partnership with community based organizations. Additionally, an individual symposium will present the GACA program and discuss the advocacy process leading to the reintroduction of this program. During the last congress advocates of the GWEP and GACA programs supported authorization and funding of geriatric programs. Geriatrics programs describing the work of the GWEPs and GACAs were reinserted into the legislative process, although this reauthorization was not completed. This advocacy process garnered strong bipartisan and agency support. The session will describe these efforts and will conclude with an update on current authorization and appropriation status.

AN UPDATE ON THE RETURN OF THE GERIATRICS ACADEMIC CAREER AWARDS PROGRAM

The Health Resources and Services Administration recently announced a notice of funding opportunity (NOFO) for the Geriatrics Academic Career Award Program (GACA). The purpose of the GACA program is to support the career development of individual junior faculty in geriatrics as academic geriatrics specialists and to provide clinical training in geriatrics, including the training of interprofessional teams of health care professionals. The GACA program is a mentorship model where the awardee is guided through a faculty career development plan, with required project deliverables, over the course of four years. The GACA supported 222 junior faculty members between 1998 and 2006, when it was discontinued. This initial NOFO provides funding for up to 26 awardees in the schools of allopathic medicine, osteopathic medicine, nursing, social work, psychology, dentistry, pharmacy, and allied health. This presentation will provide an up-to-date overview of the program with awardee demographics and project deliverables.