We recently released our annual web reports and success rate data with updated numbers for fiscal year (FY) 2018. These web products represent annual snapshots of NIH research investments, which are highlighted in this post.
I recently mentioned how much I enjoy starting a conversation through the blog with you, the investigators, grants administrators, research staff, and others in the research community. At the NIH Regional Seminar on Program Funding and Grants Administration, I hold “Open Mike” sessions where I have no slides and no prepared remarks – I let the audience determine the topics we discuss. I love the opportunity for frank conversations about whatever is on your mind. While I meet with people in the grants community at many different events, the NIH Regional Seminar is one of my favorites because of the opportunity to hear in a common setting of the perspectives and challenges of investigators and research administrators.
0 Comments
NIH has long been committed to transparency into who and what we fund. We have previously discussed the value of freely-available web tools that allow you to gain insight into NIH funding decisions. Award data available via RePORT and RePORTER, for instance, include non-sensitive information such as awardee institution, principal investigator, funding levels, research abstracts, as well as associated publications, patents, and other project outcomes. The data available through RePORT are quite powerful in their own right. However, compelling arguments exist for why researchers outside NIH should have access to even more information associated with the grants process.
6 Comments
Today we released a very important statement outlining actions NIH is taking to become part of the solution to address sexual harassment in science. I am including the full text of the statement below, as it speaks for itself. For additional information please visit our webpage.
8 Comments
It gives me enormous pleasure to extend my warm congratulations to a friend and colleague, Noni H. Byrnes, Ph.D., for her recent selection as the new Director for the NIH Center for Scientific Review (CSR).
1 Comments
As we look back at 2018 – or for that matter any year – it seems reasonable to ask questions like “Irrespective of the outcomes, did we make the right decisions?” Given the choices we had, did we go about making our choices in a skillful way? And we can dig deeper – did we take steps to minimize uncertainty? … to mitigate the impact of bad outcomes? … to seek a diversity of opinions? … to make our decisions as data-driven as possible? …
0 Comments
For the New Year, we resolve to make NIH data, reports, and analyses more accessible, interactive, and easy to use. For over a decade, the NIH Data Book has served as a helpful resource for describing funding trends on grants and contract awards, success rates, small business programs, peer review, as well as the scientific workforce. These data, presented as graphics and tables, have allowed you to get a better understanding of decisions made here at NIH. We are proud to announce a new edition is available for your 2019 reading list.
4 Comments
Advancing public health depends on science being empirical, transparent, and rigorous. As yet another step towards fostering rigorous science, we have revamped the Rigor and Reproducibility webpage to highlight and include more resources you might find helpful. Since sketching out our plan last summer with the Advisory Council to the NIH Director, the webpage now reflects policy updates and explores new resources, all in a simple and easy to read manner.
0 Comments
The 21st Century Cures Act requires federal agencies to “review applicable regulations and policies for the care and use of laboratory animals and make revisions, as appropriate, to reduce administrative burden on investigators while maintaining the integrity and credibility of research finding and protection of research animals.” This past March we requested feedback from the public on ways to reduce regulatory burden while also maintaining the highest standards for protecting animal welfare and scientific integrity. You responded with constructive and helpful feedback with more than19,000 comments. Generally, many responses supported the actions initially proposed in the request, but they were balanced with concerns from animal advocacy and other groups.
0 Comments
When research findings are made up from thin air, misrepresented in some way, or blatantly and without credit copied from others, we risk eroding the public’s trust, damaging institutional reputation, harming careers, incurring skepticism, misleading future research, and, arguably most importantly, hurting patients. NIH takes research misconduct seriously. We are being proactive.
8 Comments
5 Comments