June
28, 2001
To: |
IC Directors |
From: |
Director, Executive Secretariat |
Subject: |
IC Directors' Meeting Highlights
— May 31, 2001 |
I. Community Consultation: Meeting Report
and Follow-up
Dr. Judith Greenberg, NIGMS, explained
that the First Community Consultation on the Responsible Collection and
Use of Samples for Genetic Research took place on September 25 and 26,
2000, attended by lay people from diverse communities, non-NIH scientists,
and NIH staff. The meeting was prompted by some groups' concerns about
the storage of tissue samples from people who are identified based on
their race or ethnicity. On the other hand, such samples are very valuable
to investigators, who want the cell repository that NIGMS funds to collect
more population-based samples. Dr. Greenberg reviewed the major outcomes
of the meeting, including numerous specific recommendations. The lay participants
had many fears and concerns and a general lack of knowledge about genetics.
In general, communities want greater respect from researchers and from
the NIH, greater opportunities to provide input into research projects
and to learn of research results, and an ongoing involvement and interactive
partnership with researchers and the NIH. The community consultation ended
with the feeling that NIH had listened and a hope that it would follow
up. Dr. Greenberg listed a number of follow-up actions and their status.
Dr. Greenberg is chairing an EPMC subcommittee on community consultation,
on which most ICs are represented; the subcommittee plans to draft a "points
to consider" document to guide investigators who plan genetics studies.
She clarified that the subcommittee will not draft new regulations nor
will it require investigators to obtain community consent.
A lively discussion followed. Several IC Directors
pointed out that there is no one community that represents, for example,
all Hispanics or all African-Americans. Dr. Hyman said that thinking
of minority groups this way creates a dangerous abstraction. Dr. Klausner
said there are profound implications of overlaying the ethics of medical
research onto "the community." NIEHS documents state that
it consults "the American people" rather than lumping them
into groups. Dr. Greenberg clarified that the EPMC subcommittee has
limited itself to genetics studies involving identified communities
and aims to be thought-provoking rather than prescriptive. Dr. Baldwin
said that she asked Dr. Greenberg to form the subcommittee in order
to share information that already exists in individual ICs about working
with communities. The group expressed a strong preference against lumping
people into groups. Dr. Kirschstein asked IC Directors to talk to their
representatives to this subcommittee in preparation for further discussion
at a future IC Directors' meeting.
III. NIH IT Enterprise Funding
Ms. Pine reviewed the process the workgroup
used to research options and the key principles the group developed. The
group recommended three funding strategies:
- NIH should create a modest IT Enterprise
System Innovation Fund as a separate account in the SSF to support
the preliminary design phase of new or replacement IT enterprise systems.
- NIH should establish an IT Software Development
Investment Fund in a separate account in the SSF to support software
development costs for IT enterprise systems.
- NIH should support post-implementation operations
and maintenance costs during each system's years of use with direct
SSF or Management Fund assessments.
The CIT Board of Governors (BOG) and the FARB have
endorsed these funding strategies. Ms. Pine reported that Mr. Lanman
approved this plan; Dr. Kirschstein asked Mr. Itteilag to get that approval
in writing. If either the Enterprise System Innovation Fund or the Software
Development Investment Fund needs replenishing, the BOG would recommend
the amount needed to the FARB, which would review the request and send
its recommendation to the IC Directors. Ms. Pine explained that when
each system's multi-year plan is approved by the BOG and the FARB, as
well as by the IC Directors, the money approved in total is committed
to that system for the five-year period. In a particular year the CIO
will have the authority to move money among systems based on their individual
needs and progress. However, the overall five-year total for each system
is committed and will not be reduced. Dr. Hyman suggested renaming the
innovation fund the planning/development fund. Mr. Itteilag noted that
the software development fund can be funded by any mechanism. He also
said the people who review our budget need to be apprised of this plan.
The group endorsed this plan for implementation in FY 2002.
III. Information Items
Dr. Klausner is concerned about the
broad issue of the nature of financial information that we provide to
peer reviewers and the recommendations about funding that the peer reviewers
provide to the ICs. NCI is seeing a huge increase in large grants for
which the reviewers provide no budget guidance. He said there is a disconnect
between the peer review process and the funding levels; as a result, NIH
is losing oversight and the cost of grants is increasing significantly.
Dr. Baldwin agreed that the number of large grants is increasing and that
modular grants (up to $250,000) are in the middle of a linear increase.
She added that what reviewers do on large grants and on modular grants
merit separate discussions. Dr. Kirschstein said she would schedule discussions
on these topics at a future IC Directors' meeting. Dr. Hyman noted the
need to collect information from NIH's point of view, and Dr. Battey said
it is important to look at how average costs are calculated and presented.
Dr. Kirschstein mentioned that modular grants will be discussed at the
June 7 ACD meeting.
Dr. Kirschstein distributed rosters for several
groups. The Post-Doubling Budget Smooth-Out Work Group will be chaired
by Dr. Lenfant. Dr. Baldwin will chair a subgroup on modeling. Dr. Leshner
and Mr. Graeff will co-chair the Restructuring Committee. Dr. Kirschstein
will convene both the Restructuring Committee and the Post-Doubling
Budget Smooth-Out Work Group very shortly. Mr. Itteilag explained that
the Restructuring Committee will include subgroups on human resources,
legislation, public affairs, education, IT, acquisition, and a general
subcommittee.
Dr. Kirschstein noted that a photographer for Science
magazine took photographs of today's meeting for an upcoming article.
Dr. Kirschstein distributed copies of potential
topics for the 2001 Leadership Forum. She asked for feedback on whether
the pre-meeting for the IOM study on NIH should be a topic for the Forum.
The report is due one year after a new NIH Director is appointed. The
IOM would like to receive the funds (which will come from NIH's evaluation
set-aside) for this study now and to begin a preliminary study of NIH,
its history, etc.
Dr. Kirschstein reminded the group of the June 7
ACD meeting. She will send IC Directors the report of the construction
committee, which she said is very global and has implications for everyone.
She would like to discuss it with IC Directors after the ACD meeting.
Dr. Kirschstein sent forward to the Secretary a
memo requesting exemptions to the hiring freeze, including national
advisory council members. She noted that the Deputy Secretary, Claude
A. Allen, and the HCFA Administrator, Tom Scully, have been confirmed.
Dr. Battey circulated a Science article, "Workforce
Alternatives to Graduate Students?"
Dr. Kramer said OS wants to emphasize prevention
in the FY 2003 budget. He is trying to get more details on what is needed.
Dr. Sieving will begin working as Director, NEI,
in mid-June.
Dr. Kirschstein is waiting for OS approval to appoint
the new OEO Director.
Karen Pelham O'Steen
cc: OD Staff
|