NIH Trims Award Size as Spending Crunch Looms

Abstract

2007 U.S. BUDGET The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is asking most of its grantees to tighten their belts. The agency decided last week to cancel a scheduled inflationary boost for scientists with multiyear awards. Like other U.S. science agencies, NIH is preparing for an anticipated flat budget in 2007 that would freeze any new activities and take a bite out of existing programs. The looming crunch is a result of a breakdown in the annual budget cycle. The 109th Congress adjourned earlier this month after completing only two of 11 spending bills—for homeland security and the military. Every other agency was ordered to operate, at best, at current funding levels until 15 February. Last week, the incoming Democratic chairs of the appropriations panels said they hoped the new Congress would extend the so-called continuing resolution (CR) through 30 September, the end of the 2007 fiscal year ( Science , 15 December, p. [1666][1]). NIH decided not to wait. On 15 December, it eliminated a 3.4% inflationary boost in 2007 for “noncompeting renewals,” some three-quarters of the pool of grants held by principal investigators. The savings will be used to fund as many new awards as possible in 2007. That number, about 9600, would be similar to 2005 levels and nearly 600 more than in 2006, when NIH's $28.6 billion budget actually shrunk by $100 million. “The new policy is consistent with NIH's concerns for new investigators, those who will be applying for their f irst renewal grants, and those solely supported by NIH,” says Patrick White of the Association of American Universities. “And while we appreciate that NIH is trying to spread the pain, the critical thing is [fighting for] a reasonable increase in 2008.” Some other agencies will be even worse off. A CR will decimate the first step in the proposed budget doubling of the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy's Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. It could also wipe out a $1 billion increase that a Senate spending panel had approved for NASA to help the space agency recover from the 2003 Columbia space shuttle tragedy and damage from Hurricane Katrina in 2005. NASA officials say a CR would leave it with a $700 million shortfall that could eat into the agency's $5.2 billion science portfolio. Many lawmakers are unhappy about funding the government on a CR but see no better alternative. “In some sense, a CR is like Iraq,” says the incoming chair of the House Science Committee, Representative Bart Gordon (D-TN). “It's a matter of the least worst option … and then going forward in 2008.” [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.314.5806.1666a