Scrip is part of Pharma Intelligence UK Limited

This site is operated by Pharma Intelligence UK Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 13787459 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. The Pharma Intelligence group is owned by Caerus Topco S.à r.l. and all copyright resides with the group.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction

NIH chief: Flat budget a 'good' outcome, but sequestration looms

This article was originally published in Scrip

Executive Summary

Last year, in the depths of the uncertain months between the US teetering on the edge of a credit default and a congressional super committee's ultimate non-decision decision, given the dire predictions, the heads of the agencies that make up the National Institutes of Health (NIH) had expected their funding to be severely cut, and started making plans for a hit as deep as 5% (scripintelligence, 22 November 2011, 8 August 2011, 3 August 2011).

Last year, in the depths of the uncertain months between the US teetering on the edge of a credit default and a congressional super committee's ultimate non-decision decision, given the dire predictions, the heads of the agencies that make up the National Institutes of Health (NIH) had expected their funding to be severely cut, and started making plans for a hit as deep as 5% (scripintelligence, 22 November 2011, 8 August 2011, 3 August 2011).

But when the fiscal year 2012 budget was finally adopted by lawmakers in late December 2011 – nearly three months into that budget cycle – NIH Director Dr Francis Collins breathed a sigh of relief, with his agency's funding not being slashed, but actually getting a slight boost from the previous year (scripintelligence, 28 December 2011).

So when President Barack Obama rolled out his FY 2013 budget on 13 February, the fact that he wants the NIH's funding to remain at $30.86 billion, the same programme level as what Congress enacted for FY 2012, with the total discretionary spending at $30.7 billion, Dr Collins said he viewed the proposed flat budget as "quite a good outcome," given the nation remains in a climate of fiscal difficulties, with a growing deficit and continuing concerns about the lagging economy (scripintelligence, 14 February 2012).

Even though the NIH's proposed FY 2013 budget would involve making some "tough choices," the agency nonetheless is expected to increase the number of new and competing research project grants – by as much as 8% – which Dr Collins called "substantial".

He credited the agency's ability to bump up the number of those research awards to the expected turnover of grants that are coming to an end – freeing up more dollars for FY 2013.

"This is in part because the average duration of a grant that NIH gives to grantees has been slightly going down," Dr Collins explained during a 14 February briefing with reporters and stakeholders.

In the past, many grants were given automatically for five-year periods, he said.

But with science moving more quickly, those periods have been shortened, with the research needing only three or four years.

"What that means is there is more churn in the system, more dollars becoming available each year," Dr Collins declared, adding that the number of new and competing research project grants will jump by more than 670, totalling more than 9,400 in FY 2013.

But the overall number of research project grants will slip in FY 2013 if the president's request is adopted by Congress, falling from 35,944 in FY 2012 to 35,888.

Dr Collins noted that slide is largely due to a 1% cut in noncompeting grants.

"That is not a decision that was made lightly," he said.

But he said noncompeting grantees largely were willing to absorb the change, out of concern for their colleagues receiving the new and competing grants.

Dr Collins insisted that the NIH remains committed to basic research in its FY 2013 budget, with funding levels remaining consistent at more than 50% dedicated to that area.

"We do not see that shifting," he said.

Dr Collins noted that because of last year's "vigorous discussion" about the formation of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), some may have assumed the NIH was backing away from basic research (scripintelligence, 27 January 2011, 24 February 2011, 12 May 2011, 19 September 2011, 22 September 2011, 3 October 2011).

"That is not the case," Dr Collins said, insisting that basic research will continue to be supported by his agency. "It is the seed corn for the future. We take that commitment very seriously, and will continue to play that role as vigorously as we can."

He noted the NIH is the "main supporter" of biomedical basic research.

"If NIH doesn't fund the general basic science in biomedical areas, it is going to have a hard time happening," Dr Collins contended.

But he also emphasized that NCATS, which is tasked with developing new methods and technologies aimed at reducing, removing or bypassing the costly, time-consuming bottlenecks that impede the speedy delivery of innovative drugs, diagnostics and medical devices to patients, also holds great promise for ensuring the "deluge of discoveries that are coming out of basic science laboratories will move as quickly as possible into therapeutic and diagnostic advances".

President Obama is asking Congress for a $64.3 million increase in funding for NCATS – a figure Dr Collins called "small" compared with the nearly $31 billion in the agency's FY 2013 proposed budget.

Even if Congress maintains the NIH's funding at the same levels, looming on the horizon are the "black clouds" of the sequestration – the automatic $1.2 trillion in spending cuts lawmakers put into the legislation enacted last August to raise the US debt ceiling, Dr Collins lamented.

When the Super Congress failed to reach an agreement this past November on at least $1.2 trillion in spending reductions, that action triggered the mandated sequestration, with across-the-board cuts set to kick in at the beginning of next year.

Obama administration officials argued that the president's proposed FY 2013 budget request could provide those savings, and therefore, the US could avoid the sequestration.

But if nothing changes between now and January, Dr Collins said his agency's spending would be slashed by as much as 9%.

The greatest argument the NIH has on its side to maintain its funding – or even gain a boost, if Congress sees fit – is the contribution the agency plays in the nation's position in global competitiveness, he said.

"We would make the case that the NIH is not only the best hope we have for advances in human health, there is very strong evidence to support that we are a major contributor to the US economy and job growth," the NIH chief argued.

Every dollar the NIH gives out in grants results in $2 in economic goods and services that are produced in the first year to the local economy, Dr Collins said.

"It is important for our economy and for the opportunities for our citizens that we don't miss out," he said.

Related Companies

Latest Headlines
See All
UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

SC016263

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Thank you for submitting your question. We will respond to you within 2 business days. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel