224 Influence of gender on animal science research funding from the National Institute of Food and Agriculture

Abstract

Abstract According to the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, females and males in science disciplines obtain bachelor of science degrees at or near parity, yet females are not equally represented in academic faculty positions. This is true for agricultural field including the animal sciences. The National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) administers the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) at USDA, a flagship competitive grants program that fund research, education, and extension efforts with a total appropriation of $455 million in 2023. Our objective was to determine the difference between genders for submission rates (i.e., number of standard and seed grant applications submitted), success rates (i.e., number of grant award/number of applications submitted), and peer reviewers of grant applications in the main animal related AFRI program area priorities. All applications submitted to AFRI programs in animal genomics, reproduction, health, nutrition and growth, and welfare during 2013 to 2022 were evaluated. Gender was assigned to Project Directors (PD) and peer reviewers using first names as input into Gender API software (Gender-API.com; Passau, Germany) with ≥ 95% accuracy and ≥ 20 database occurrences used as quality filters and binary outcomes only (i.e., male or female). Effect of gender on submission rates, success rates, and peer review panel compositions were then analyzed using Pearson’s Chi-squared tests with P ≤ 0.05 considered significant. A total of 3,392 applications were submitted, of which 2,579 (76%) PD genders were assigned and analyzed further. Overall, the proportional submission rate for females was 28% and for males was 72%. Submission rates for females increased (P = 0.0497) over time ranging from 22% in 2013 to 33% in 2021. Submission rates differed by gender across programs (P < 0.0001) and ranged from 22% female in animal reproduction to 48% female in animal welfare. Overall, the funding success rate was 22% and did not differ between genders (P = 0.9826). Success rates did not differ between genders over time (P = 0.4691), but differences among programs approached significance (P = 0.0670). Across 53 panels, 42% of panelists were female; no differences were identified for the proportion of female panelists over time (P = 0.9762) or by program (P = 0.7028). Females submitted less than one-half as many applications as males, but the proportion of submissions by females increased over time. This trend remained consistent despite challenges of relocation of NIFA and COVID-19 during this time. Funding success rates did not differ by gender, but some variation was observed across programs. Overall, the proportion of NIFA panelists who were female exceeded the proportion of applications submitted by females. These results indicate that although differences in gender existed for application submission rate and panel composition, these differences did not impact funding success rate of applications in animal science programs at NIFA, which did not differ between genders.