>>WELCOME.
LOOK WHAT I GET TO DO!
WE ARE IN SESSION.
WE'RE GOING TO START BY READING
THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST
STATEMENT AND YOU'RE WELCOME TO
SING ALONG IF YOU KNOW THE
WORDS.
YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED A
CONFLICT OF INTEREST FORM FROM
DEA.
IT IS ALSO POSTED IN THE
ELECTRONIC COUNCIL BOOK.
PLEASE SIGN IT AS I READ THE
CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT
AND ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE WILL
SUFFICE, AND RETURN IT VIA EMAIL
TO LINDA.
ADVISORS AND CONSULTANTS SERVING
AS MEMBERS OF PUBLIC ADVISORY
COMMITTEES MAY NOT PARTICIPATE
IN SITUATIONS IN WHICH ANY
VIOLATION OF CONFLICT OF
INTEREST AND LAWS MAY OCCUR.
IS NOT PRESENT DURING REVIEW OF
APPLICATIONS OR PROJECTS IN
WHICH TO THE MEMBERS' KNOWLEDGE
ANY OF THE FOLLOWING HAS A
FINANCIAL INTEREST: THE MEMBER,
HIS/HER SPOUSE, MINOR CHILD,
PARTNER, INCLUDING CLOSE
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATES, OR AN
ORGANIZATION WITH WHICH THE
MEMBER IS CONNECTED.
IN ADDITION, CONFLICTS OF
INTEREST MAY OCCUR BECAUSE OF
OTHER PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS,
SUCH AS WITH RECENT STUDENTS,
COLLABORATORS, PERSONAL FRIENDS,
OR SCIENTISTS WITH WHOM THE
MEMBER HAS HAD LONGSTANDING
SCIENTIFIC OR PERSONAL
DIFFERENCES.
TO ENSURE THAT A MEMBER DOES NOT
PARTICIPATE IN THE DISCUSSION OF
NOR VOTE ON AN APPLICATION IN
WHICH HE OR SHE IS IN CONFLICT,
A WRITTEN CERTIFICATION IS
REQUIRED.
THIS STATEMENT WILL BECOME PART
OF THE MEETING FILE.
THE OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS
HAS PROVIDED A WAIVER FOR
FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MEMBERS EMPLOYED IN ONE
UNIVERSITY OF A STATE
MULTI-UNIVERSITY SYSTEM TO
REVIEW APPLICATIONS FOR A
SEPARATE UNIVERSITY OF THE SAME
SYSTEM, PROVIDED THE MEMBER HAS
NO CONFLICTING INSTITUTIONAL
RESPONSIBILITIES.
IN ADDITION, A FEDERAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE MEMBER WHO IS EMPLOYED
BY A PRIVATE INSTITUTION OR AT A
PRIVATE INSTITUTION AND AT ONE
OF ITS AFFILIATES, MAY
PARTICIPATE IN THE REVIEW OF A
GRANT APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY
ANOTHER AFFILIATE OF THE PRIVATE
INSTITUTES IF HE OR SHE DOES NOT
HOLD A JOINT APPOINTMENT WITH
THE AFFILIATE THAT HAS SUBMITTED
THE APPLICATION, DOES NOT HAVE
AFFILIATE-WIDE RESPONSIBILITIES
AND HAS A WAIVER TO DO SO.
WE AT NIGMS KEEP TRACK OF THE
MORE EASILY IDENTIFIABLE
CONFLICTS FOR YOU.
WE RELY ON YOU TO IDENTIFY OTHER
TYPES OF CONFLICTS SUCH AS THOSE
WE ARE UNLIKELY TO KNOW ABOUT,
STUDENTS, FRIENDS, ET CETERA.
PLEASE DON'T HESITATE TO LET US
KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS
ABOUT A POTENTIAL CONFLICT AND
IF DURING THE MEETING YOU FIND
YOU REALIZE YOU ARE IN CONFLICT
WITH AN APPLICATION, OR ANOTHER
SITUATION ARISES, PLE PLEASE JUT
LET US KNOW AND WE WILL MANAGE
THAT FOR YOU.
OKAY.
WITH THAT, WE'RE GOING TO START
WITH INTRODUCTIONS.
SO IF WE COULD START WITH TERRI,
PLEASE, AND THEN MOVE AROUND THE
CIRCLE.
>>GOOD MORNING.
USUALLY WE'RE TELLING PEOPLE TO
MUTE OR UNMUTE.
GOOD MORNING, I'M TERRI GOSS
KINZY, PROFESSOR EMERITUS,
BIOCHEMISTRY AND MOLECULAR
BIOLOGY AT RUTGERS, ROBERT WOOD
JOHNSON MEDICAL SCHOOL.
MY RESEARCH INTEREST OVER MY
CAREER HAS BEEN IN TRANSLATIONAL
CONTROL OF GENE EXPRESSION IN
FUNGAL SYSTEMS WITH PARTICULAR
INTEREST IN TRANSLATION
ELONGATION.
>>HI, EVERYONE.
I'M WENDY YOUNG.
I'VE BEEN IN BIOPHARMA FOR
30-PLUS YEARS, MOST RECENTLY WAS
SVP OF SMALL MOLECULES AT
GENENTECH AND CURRENTLY AN
ADVISOR AT GOOGLE VENTURES.
>>MY NAME IS JULIA WID HAM,
DEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY AND
BIOCHEMISTRY AT UNIVERSITY OF
OREGON, AND MY LAB'S RESEARCH
FOCUSES ON DEVELOPMENT AND USE
OF SPECTROSCOPIC DENEEX TO STUDY
RNA FOLDING.
>>HELLO, EVERYBODY.
RON KING WITH UNIVERSITY OF
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA,
TRANSLATIONAL GENOMICS
DEPARTMENT, AND FOCUSING ON
AGAIN TRAINING AND
COMMERCIALIZATION AND
ENTREPRENEURSHIP, AND I JUST
WANT TO SAY A SPECIAL THANKS
ACTUALLY TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE
STAFF AND ALL, SEEING EVERYBODY
WHEN YOU'RE NOT IN SUCH A LITTLE
BOX IN THE SCREEN HERE IS
WONDERFUL AND I KNOW WHAT IT
TAKES TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN SO I
APPRECIATE ALL OF WHAT YOU'VE
DONE TO GET US HERE AND
HOPEFULLY I'M NOT SPEAKING TOO
SOON BECAUSE I HAVEN'T GOTTEN
HOME YET, BUT THANK YOU.
>>I'M DANIELLE LI, ASSOCIATE
PROFESSOR OF SLOAN SCHOOL OF
MANAGEMENT, I'M AN ECONOMIST AND
I STUDY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY.
>>BRENT EYE VER SON, UNIVERSITY
OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN IN THE
DEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY BUT FOR
THE LAST DECADE I WAS DEAN OF
THE SCHOOL OF UNDERGRADUATE
STUDIES AND I ALSO DID A STINT
AS AN ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT
PROFESSIONAL SO I SPENT A LOT OF
TIME THINKING ABOUT THE
UNDERGRADUATE EXPERIENCE AND
EDUCATION AND GENERAL EDUCATION
OF THAT.
>>GOOD MORNING.
I'M ERICA BROWN, DIRECTOR OF THE
DIVISION OF EXTRAMURAL
ACTIVITIES AT NIGMS AND THE
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF COUNCIL.
>>MORNING.
I'M THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
NIGMS.
>>I'M NATALIE AHN, PROFESSOR
UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO BOULDER,
SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION AND KINASE
REGULATION WITH AN EMPHASIS ON
PROTEOMICS AND MASS
SPECTROMETRY.
>>I'M DAVID MATHEWS FROM THE
UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER.
I'M IN THE DEPARTMENT OF
BIOCHEMISTRY AND BIOPHYSICS AND
OUR CENTER FOR RNA BIOLOGY.
MY GROUP STUDIES THE
COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY OF RNA.
>>GOOD MORNING EVERYONE.
I'M MARK -- SENIOR VICE
PRESIDENT -- CLINICAL FARM YOLG
AT GILEAD, ALSO THE IMMEDIATE
PAST PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN
SOCIETY FOR CLINICAL
PHARMACOLOGY AND THERAPEUTICS.
IT'S AN HONOR AND PRIVILEGE TO
BE HERE WITH ALL OF YOU.
THANK YOU.
>>HELLO.
I'M LESILEE ROSE.
I'M AT THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA DAVIS IN THE
DEPARTMENT OF MOLECULAR AND
CELLULAR BIOLOGY, AND I STUDY
EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF THE NEEM
TOTAL C. ELEGANS, CELL AND
DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY.
>>GOOD MORNING, I'M RON
PRZYGODZKI, DIRECTOR OF GENOMIC
MEDICINE IN THE OFFICE OF
RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT IN U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS.
>>MY NAME IS -- ASSISTANT
PROFESSOR IN THE UNIVERSITY OF
ILLINOIS AT I URBANA-CHAMPAIGN.
THIS IS MY FIRST TIME HERE, I'M
VERY EXCITED TO BE HERE.
WE STUDY HOW BACTERIA, OUR
BEAUTIFUL FRIENDS, REGULATE
GROWTH AND GROW SO FAST.
THANKS.
>>GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS PAMELA STACKS.
I'M FROM SAN JOSÉ STATE IN
CALIFORNIA, AND IN THE
DEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY,
PROFESSOR E EMERITUS, BIOCHEMIS,
GREAT TO BE HERE THIS MORNING.
>>WELL, THANK YOU ALL.
THANKS FOR BEING HERE AND ALL OF
YOUR HARD WORK THAT HAVE LED UP
TO THIS MEETING.
OH, SORRY, WE HAVE TWO MORE
ONLINE.
I FORGOT.
ANGELA DEPACE, COULD YOU EXHIBIT
INTRODUCE YOURSELF?
>>CAN EVERYONE SEE ME AND HEAR
ME?
>>YES, WE CAN.
>>WONDERFUL.
MY NAME IS ANGELA DEPACE.
I'M CURRENTLY ON LEAVE FROM MY
POSITION AS ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR
OF SYSTEMS BIOLOGY AT HARVARD
MEDICAL SCHOOL, WHERE MY LAB
STUDIES THE MECHANISM AND
EVOLUTION OF ANIMAL
TRANSCRIPTION AND -- EMBRYOS AND
I AM SERVING AS A SCIENTIFIC
PROGRAM OFFICER AT THE HOWARD
HUGHES MEDICAL INSTITUTE, WHERE
I SUPPORT THE FELLOWS PROGRAM
AND I SERVE AS THE LIAISON TO
THE HHMI CENTER FOR THE
ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE
LEADERSHIP AND CULTURE.
IT'S NICE TO SEE YOU ALL IN THE
SAME ROOM TOGETHER, EVEN THOUGH
I'M ON ZOOM.
>>HHMI IS JUST DOWN THE ROAD SO
NEXT TIME YOU'RE THERE, COME
VISIT US.
ANGELA BYERS WINSTON.
>>GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE FROM
WISCONSIN, I APOLOGIZE I'LL KEEP
WORKING ON MY CAMERA, NOT SURE
WHY IT'S NOT TURNING ON, COMING
FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN
MADISON, WHERE I'M A PROFESSOR
IN THE DEPARTMENT OF MEDICINE,
AND MY RESEARCH IS ON THE
SCIENCE OF EFFECTIVE MENTORSHIP
IN STEM FIELDS.
THANK YOU.
>>THANK YOU TO BOTH ANGELAS.
I THINK THAT'S NOW EVERYBODY.
SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO
CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES
FROM THE PAST MEETING.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR
AMENDMENTS TO THE MINUTES?
NO?
THEREFORE, I'M GOING TO MOVE
THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES.
DOES ANYONE OPPOSE THAT?
OKAY.
THE MEETING MINUTES FROM THE
PAST MEETING ARE APPROVED AND
THEN I NEED TO COU CONFIRM FUTUE
COUNCIL MEETING DATES WITH YOU.
THEY ARE AS OF NOW THURSDAY,
SEPTEMBER 7TH, 2023, WHICH WILL
BE A VIRTUAL MEETING, THURSDAY,
FEBRUARY 1ST, 2024, ALSO A
VIRTUAL MEETING, AND THEN NEXT
MAY, THURSDAY, MAY 16TH, 2024,
WE'LL PLAN TO HAVE AN IN-PERSON
MEETING.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY PROBLEMS
WITH THOSE DATES?
OKAY.
THEN I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE THE
DATES.
AND THEREFORE, BY ACCLAMATION, I
THINK THEY'RE APPROVED.
OKAY.
I'M NOW GOING TO GIVE MY
DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
WE'LL HAVE A DISCUSSION AND THEN
WE'LL MOVE ON TO OTHER TOPICS.
SO I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO GO UP
THERE.
THANK YOU.
FEELS LIKE A NEW EXPERIENCE TO
BE STANDING UP HERE GIVING A
TALK, I'VE DONE IT MANY TIMES
BEFORE.
SO THANK YOU ALL AGAIN FOR
JOINING US FOR THIS COUNCIL
MEETING.
AND I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU AN
OVERVIEW OF SOME OF WHAT'S GOING
ON AT NIGMS AND THEN HOPEFULLY
WE'LL HAVE A ROBUST DISCUSSION
ABOUT CURRENT TOPICS AND GET
YOUR FEEDBACK ON THEM.
JUST TO REMIND YOU, WE DO HAVE
SOME AD HOC PARTICIPANTS IN
ADDITION TO REGULAR
COUNCILMEMBERS TODAY, AND
THEY'VE INTRODUCED THEMSELVES,
MARK AND BRENT, SO THANK YOU
BOTH FOR COMING.
AND AS WE HAVE DONE FOR THE PAST
SEVEN YEARS OR SO, WE ALSO HAVE
TWO EARLY CAREER INVESTIGATOR AD
HOCS ON COUNCIL, PAOLA AND
JULIA, WHO BOTH INTRODUCED
THEMSELVES, AND WE FIND IT VERY
VALUABLE TO BRING EARLY CAREER
INVESTIGATORS INTO OUR COUNCIL
SESSION TO GET THEIR PERSPECTIVE
ON WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE
ECOSYSTEM AND GET THEIR INPUT,
AND ALSO TO GET THEIR HELP IN
TELLING THEIR PEERS ABOUT WHAT
GOES ON IN COUNCIL BECAUSE
COUNCIL IS A LITTLE MYSTERIOUS
RELATIVE TO WHAT GOES ON IN THE
STUDY SECTIONS WHICH PEOPLE ARE
MORE FAMILIAR WITH, SO THANKS TO
BOTH OF YOU FOR AGREEING TO HELP
US WITH THOSE THINGS.
WE HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF
PERSONNEL CHANGES AS IS ALWAYS
THE CASE AT NIGMS SO I WANT TO
INTRODUCE YOU TO SOME NEW STAFF
MEMBERS.
FIRST ASHLEY BARNES IS A NEW
PROGRAM DIRECTOR IN OUR
BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY BRANCH OF
OUR BIOPHYSICS, BIOMEDICAL
TECHNOLOGY AND COMPUTATIONAL
BIOSCIENCES DIVISION.
WELCOME TO HIM.
SAMSAMMY KATTA, PREVIOUSLY A
CONTRACTOR IN OUR DIVISION OF
DATA INTEGRATION MODELING AND
ANALYTICS.
SHE'S NOW COME ON BOARD AS A
FULL FEDERAL EMPLOYEE AND IT'S
REALLY GREAT HAVING HER AS PART
OF THE TEAM PERMANENTLY.
MELISSA KOPYTO IS A MANAGEMENT
ANALYST IN OUR DIVISION OF
MANAGEMENT AND WORKING CLOSELY
WITH SALLY LEE AND HER STAFF.
RITA MILLER IS A NEW PROGRAM
DIRECTOR IN DEVELOPMENTAL AND
CELLULAR PROCESSES BRANCH IN OUR
GENETICS AND MOLECULAR, CELLULAR
AND DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY
DIVISION.
AND IT'S GREAT HAVING HER ON THE
TEAM AS WELL.
WE HAVE AN IMPORTANT PROMOTION
TO ANNOUNCE.
AYANNA VEST, WHO WORKS IN
SALLY'S TEAM IN THE DIVISION OF
MANAGEMENT IS NOW SUPERVISORY
MANAGEMENT ANALYST, RUNNING A
TEAM WITHIN THAT THAT FOCUSES ON
HR AND OTHER RELATED ACTIVITIES.
OF COURSE WITH ALL THESE COMINGS
AND PROMOTIONS, THERE ARE SOME
DEPARTURES THAT WE NEED TO MAKE
YOU AWARE.
BOB COYNE, WHO WAS A PROGRAM
DIRECTOR IN THE DEVELOPMENTAL
CELLULAR PROCESSES BRANCH IN
GMCDB HAS RETIRED.
WE WISH HIM THE BEST IN THIS
NEXT PHASE OF HIS LIFE.
AND BERNICE DURAN, WHO WAS ALSO
IN THE DIVISION OF MANAGEMENT,
HAS NOW MOVED ON AND IS WORKING
WITH THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR
COMPLEMENTARY AND INTEGRATIVE
HEALTH.
AND WE DEFINITELY MISS HER SENSE
OF HUMOR.
SHE BROUGHT A CERTAIN SPARK TO
OUR OFFICE UPSTAIRS.
MARTHA GARCIA, WHO WAS A PROGRAM
OFFICER IN THE PHARMACOLOGICAL
AND PHYSIOLOGICAL SCIENCES
BRANCH IN PPBC HAS NOW MOVED TO
THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF
DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND
KIDNEY DISEASES.
JOE GINDHART, WHO MANY REMEMBER
WAS A BRANCH CHIEF FOR THE
CELLULAR BIOLOGY BRANCH IN GMCDB
TOOK A PROMOTION AND HAS NOW
MOVED TO BECOME THE DEPUTY
DIRECTOR OFDIRECTOR AT THE CHILD
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH
HIM IN THAT NEW ROLE AS WELL.
FRANK SHEWMAKER, PROGRAM OFFICER
IN THE BIOPHYSICS BRANCH IN B
BB -- HAS NOW MOVED TO THE
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF
NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND
STROKE AS A PROMOTION.
DARREN SLEDJESKI, WAS ERICA'S
DEPUTY, HAS NOW BECOME THE
ACTUAL DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISION
OF EXTRAMURAL ACTIVITIES IN THE
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ARTHRITIS
AND MUSCULOSKELETAL AND SKIN
DISEASES.
SO HE'S NOW ERICA'S PEER AROUND
THE TABLE OF DEA, WHICH WE WISH
HIM THE BEST BUT WE CERTAINLY DO
MISS DARREN.
FINALLY FEI WANG, BRANCH CHIEF
IN BBCB HAS NOW MOVED ON TO THE
NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING AND
WE WISH HER THE BEST AS WELL.
NIH-WIDE, IMPORTANT NEW
APPOINTMENT TO ANNOUNCE TO YOU,
ESPECIALLY FROM NIGMS'S
PERSPECTIVE IS A NEW DIRECTOR OF
THE NIH TRIBAL HEALTH RESEARCH
OFFICE, ALSO CALLED THRO.
KARINA WALTERS, WHO IS SOMEONE
QUITE FAMILIAR TO NIGMS THROUGH
HER WORK IN THE NATIVE AMERICAN
RESEARCH CENTERS FOR HEALTH
PROGRAMS HAS BEEN RECENTLY
APPOINTED, STARTED AT THE END OF
APRIL, APRIL 24TH, AND SHE
BRINGS MORE THAN 28 YEARS OF
AMERICAN INDIAN ALASKA NATIVE
RESEARCH EXPERIENCE TO THE JOB
SO I THINK SHE'LL BE VERY
VALUABLE IN HER KNOWLEDGE AND
SPER SPECULPERSPECTIVE WILL BE L
FOR US AS WE NOT JUST SORT OF
REINVIG RART THE PROGRAM AFTER
THE EVALUATION AND TRIBAL
CONSULTATION THAT WE DID AND
DISCUSSED WITH YOU ON COUNCIL A
YEAR OR SO AGO, BUT DEVELOP SOME
NEW PROGRAMS THAT YOU'VE BEEN
INVOLVED IN HELPING US PLAN AND
WE'LL BE ROLLING OUT IN THE NEXT
YEAR OR SO.
SHE'LL WORK WITH US, WITH OTHER
INSTITUTES AND CENTERS ON THEIR
PROGRAMS AND HOPEFULLY DEVELOP
STRONGER RELATIONSHIPS WITH
FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED TRIBES
ACROSS THE COUNTRY TO PROMOTE
HEALTH RESEARCH THAT'S IMPORTANT
TO THOSE TRIBES.
SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING
WITH KARINA.
WE DO HAVE A NUMBER OF JOB
VACANCIES AND WE'D LIKE YOUR
HELP IN MAKING PEOPLE AWARE OF
THEM AND TRYING TO GET SOME
EXCELLENT APPLICANTS.
WE HAVE A BRANCH CHIEF OPENING
AS I MENTIONED, FEI WANG HAS
LEFT AND THEREFORE WE'RE LOOKING
FOR A REPLACEMENT FOR HER, SO IF
YOU KNOW OF SOMEONE GOOD,
BIOPHYSICS, EITHER IN THE
EXTRAMURAL COMMUNITY, ACADEMIA
OR ELSEWHERE, PLEASE LET THEM
KNOW ABOUT THIS POSSIBILITY.
AND WE HAVE A NUMBER OF PROGRAM
DIRECTOR POSITIONS OPEN.
WE'RE ACTUALLY EXPANDING THE
NUMBER OF POSITIONS WE HAVE
BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF NEW
PROGRAMS AND ADDITIONAL GRANTS
WE'VE TAKEN ON DUE TO THE REALLY
EXCELLENT INCREASES IN BUDGETS
WE'VE HAD OVER THE LAST FIVE OR
SIX YEARS, BUT THAT MEANS MORE
WORK AND, THEREFORE, WE NEED
MORE STAFF.
AND SO WE'RE ADDING STAFF IN
BBCB, WE'RE ADDING STAFF UNTIL
THE DIVISION OF RESEARCH
CAPACITY BUILDING, AND IN
GENETICS MOLECULAR CELLULAR AND
DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY.
THEY ALL HAVE OPENINGS FOR
PROGRAM OFFICERS.
IF YOU KNOW PEOPLE WHO WOULD BE
INTERESTED, PLEASE ENCOURAGE
THEM TO APPLY.
THEY WILL APPLY THROUGH THE NIH
GLOBAL RECRUITMENT, WHICH IS NOT
TRIVIAL, IF YOU HAVEN'T APPLIED
FOR A GOVERNMENT JOB BEFORE, IT
OPENED MAY 15TH, IT WILL CLOSE
MAY 24TH.
IF YOU KNOW SOMEONE AND THEY
WANT TO DO THIS, WE'RE VERY
HAPPY TO HELP THEM NAVIGATE THE
PROCESS, SO PLEASE POINT THEM TO
US AND WE CAN GIVE THEM
ASSISTANCE ON HOW TO PROPERLY
APPLY FOR THE JOBS AND MAKE SURE
THEY MAKE THE CERTIFICATES, ET
CETERA.
SAVE THE DATE.
THIS IS THE TWO NAMED LECTURES
THAT NIGMS SPONSORS EACH YEAR,
THEY HAPPEN IN THE FALL AND
WE'RE VERY PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE
WHO WILL BE GIVING THOSE.
THE FIRST IS THE JUDITH
GREENBERG EARLY CAREER
INVESTIGATOR LECTURE, WHICH WE
STARTED SIX OR SEVEN YEARS AGO,
SOMETHING ON THAT ORDER, AND WE
RECENTLY RENAMED TO HONOR THE
FORMER DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF NIGMS.
MANY OF YOU KNOW JUDITH
GREENBERG.
AND THIS YEAR I'M VERY PLEASED
TO ANNOUNCE THAT AKHILA RAJAN AT
THE FRED MUCH HUTCHINSON CANCER
CENTER WILL BE THE LECTURER.
THAT WILL BE SEPTEMBER 27TH,
1:00 TO 2:00 P.M. EASTERN TIME,
AND THAT WILL BE BROADCAST BY
NIH VIDEOCAST AND RECORDED, SO
YOU CAN WATCH IT EITHER LIVE AT
THE TIME OR LATER, DEPENDING ON
YOUR SCHEDULE.
THE DEWITT STETTEN LECTURE WILL
BE GIVEN BY RY YOUNG FROM TEXAS
A & M UNIVERSITY AND THAT WILL
HAPPEN NOVEMBER 8TH FROM 3:00 TO
4:00 AND AGAIN THAT WILL BE
BROADCAST VIA NIH VIDEOCAST AS
WELL AS RECORDED.
THESE WILL BOTH BE EXCEPTIONAL
LECTURES, I CAN ASSURE YOU, SO I
HOPE YOU WILL TUNE IN AND I HOPE
YOU'LL TELL OTHER PEOPLE ABOUT
THEM.
NEW PARTNERSHIP THAT WE'VE
DEVELOPED TO TRY TO PROMOTE NOT
JUST NIGMS'S BUT NIH IN
GENERAL'S STEM K-12 ACTIVITIES
TO TRY TO GET STUDENTS
INTERESTED IN CAREERS IN
BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH.
THIS IS WITH KAHOOT.
IF YOU HAVE ELEMENTARY OR MIDDLE
SCHOOLERS OR KNOW ELEMENTARY OR
MIDDLE SCHOOLERS YOU MAY BE
FAMILIAR WITH KAHOOT.
THIS IS A PLATFORM THAT ALLOWS
INTERACTIVE QUIZZES, WHICH ARE
REALLY IN A KIND OF GAME-SHOW
FORMAT, THEY'VE GOT MUSIC AND
LEADER BOARDS AND ALL KINDS OF
INTERESTING STUFF.
AND STEPHANIE OLDER AND HER
GROUP HAVE SET UP A
COLLABORATION ON BEHALF OF ALL
OF NIH FOR US TO HAVE A FEATURED
PARTNER POSITION SUCH THAT OUR
QUIZZES WILL BE HIGHLIGHTED ON
THEIR MAIN PAGE AND WILL BE
PROMOTED BY KAHOOT.
AND YOU CAN SEE THIS IS ACTUALLY
RECENTLY THE WAY THEIR FEATURED
PARTNERS BOARD LOOKS SO WE'RE
RIGHT THERE, RIGHT UNDER
MICROSOFT, NEXT TO NASA, THE
EUROPEAN UNION, "STAR WARS,"
MARVEL COMICS, ET CETERA, ET
CETERA.
SO WE THINK THIS MIGHT BE QUITE
IMPACTFUL IN TERMS OF GETTING
THE MESSAGE OUT ABOUT THE
IMPORTANCE OF BIOMEDICAL
RESEARCH AND CAREERS IN RESEARCH
TO YOUNG PEOPLE.
SO STAY TUNED.
THERE ALREADY ARE A NUMBER OF
KAHOOTS UP THERE THAT WE
DEVELOPED AS PART OF OUR
PATHWAYS PROGRAM THAT YOU MAY
REMEMBER.
I THINK THERE'S ONE FROM THE
NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DRUG
ABUSE, BUT THERE WILL BE MORE
COMING AS WELL.
I WANT TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON
SOME OF THE UNITE FUNDING
OPPORTUNITIES SO ON THIS
COUNCIL, WE'VE TALKED A NUMBER
OF TIMES ABOUT THE UNITE
INITIATIVE WHICH IS AN NIH-WIDE
INITIATIVE TO PROMOTE DIVERSITY,
EQUITY, INCLUSION AND
ACCESSIBILITY AND YOU, COUNCIL,
CLEARED SEVERAL OF THE CONCEPTS
FOR US SO WE CAN MOVE AHEAD WITH
THESE INITIATIVES AND I'M REALLY
HAPPY TO SAY THAT THREE OF THEM
ARE NOW LIVE ON THE STREETS, AND
WE'LL BE ACCEPTING APPLICATIONS.
THE FIRST IS RESEARCH WITH
ACTIVITIES RELATED TO DIVERSITY
OR REWARD.
AND ALISON GAMMI DID THE HEAVY
LIFTING ALONG WITH THE TEAM ON
GETTING THIS OUT.
THIS IS AN R01 PROGRAM SO REAL
LIVE R01s FOR INVESTIG INVESTIGS
WHO HAVE DONE REALLY EXCEPTIONAL
THINGS TO PROMOTE DIVERSITY,
EQUITY AND INCLUSION AND
ACCESSIBILITY AND WHO CURRENTLY
DON'T HAVE NIH GRANT RESEARCH
FUNDING.
THIS WILL BRING RESEARCHERS INTO
THE SYSTEM WHO AREN'T CURRENTLY
FUNDED BY NIH.
IT'S GOING TO RECOGNIZE PEOPLE
WHO HAVE DONE EXCEPTIONAL THINGS
FOR DEIA.
IT'S GOING TO SUPPORT BOTH THEIR
RESEARCH BUT ALSO ALLOW THEM TO
CONTINUE THOSE DEIA ACTIVITIES.
SO I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE
AN EXTREMELY IMPACTFUL PROGRAM
IN TERMS OF HELPING TO DIVERSIFY
FUNDING FROM NIH, GET MORE
INSTITUTIONS, MORE REGIONS, MORE
PEOPLE FUNDED, AND ALSO PROMOTE
BRINGING ADDITIONAL TALENT INTO
THE SYSTEM.
WE ALSO HAVE LAUNCHED THE
INSTRUMENTATION GRANT PROGRAM
FOR RESOURCE-LIMITED
INSTITUTIONS.
DOROTHY BECKETT AND HER TEAM
WERE INSTRUMENTAL IN GETTING
THIS ONE OUT.
WE'RE CALLING THIS THE RLI-S10
RESOURCE-LIMITED INSTITUTION
S10.
AND IT AIMS TO ENHANCE RESEARCH
CAPACITY AND EDUCATIONAL
OPPORTUNITIES AT
RESOURCE-LIMITED INSTITUTIONS,
AND IT WILL ALLOW THEM TO
PURCHASE MODERN SCIENTIFIC
INSTRUMENTATION.
AND THERE'S SOME IMPORTANT
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THIS PROGRAM
AND THE EXISTING INSTRUMENTATION
GRANT PROGRAMS AT NIH.
IMPORTANTLY, THE EQUIPMENT FOR
THIS PROGRAM CAN BE USED NOT
JUST FOR RESEARCH BUT ALSO FOR
TEACHING AND EDUCATION.
SO THAT'S, I THINK, AN IMPORTANT
EXPANSION OF THE ABILITY OF
INSTITUTIONS TO PURCHASE
EQUIPMENT THAT WILL HELP BOTH
THEIR RESEARCH AND THEIR
TEACHING MISSIONS.
AND ALSO THE MAJOR USERS THAT
ARE ACQUIRED TO APPLY FOR THESE
GRANTS, YOU HAVE TO HAVE THREE
MAJOR USERS BUT FOR THIS
PROGRAM, THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE
NIH-FUNDED THE WAY THEY ARE FOR
THE OTHER PROGRAMS, AND ONE OR
MORE OF THOSE MAJOR USERS CAN
ACTUALLY BE A COURSE.
SO AGAIN, THAT'S A REALLY
IMPORTANT DISTINCTION, WHICH
WILL ALLOW, I THINK, THIS
PROGRAM TO REALLY BE IMPACTFUL
IN TERMS OF BUILDING RESEARCH
AND EDUCATIONAL CAPACITY AT
INSTITUTIONS ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
AND BOTH THESE NOFOs ARE OUT.
THE DATE FOR THE FIRST ONE IS
JUNE 5TH AND THE FIRST DUE DATE
FOR THE SECOND ONE IS JULY 3RD.
BUT THERE WILL BE FOR THE FIRST
ONE, THREE DUE DATES A YEAR, AND
THE OTHER ONE WILL, I THINK, BE
ONCE A YEAR.
THEN FINALLY, THE STRENGTHENING
RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES FOR NIH
GRANTS OR STRONG PROGRAM HAS
BEEN LAUNCHED.
THIS WAS DEVELOPED AND LED BY
THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF
MINORITY HEALTH AND HEALTH
DISPARITIES AND OUR COLLEAGUES
THERE: IT'S GOING TO PROVIDE
SUPPORT FOR RESOURCE-LIMITED
INSTITUTIONS TO CONDUCT RESEARCH
CAPACITY NEEDS ASSESSMENTS, SO
FIGURE OUT WHAT ARE THEIR NEEDS
IN TERMS OF BUILDING THEIR
RESEARCH CAPACITY, AND THEN USE
THE RESULTS OF THOSE NEEDS
ASSESSMENTS TO DEVELOP STRATEGIC
ACTION PLANS FOR HOW THEY CAN
ACHIEVE THOSE GOALS AND OVERCOME
THE OBSTACLES.
THIS IS ALSO OUT, THIS NOFO IS
ALSO OUT AND THE FIRST
APPLICATION DUE DATE IS
SEPTEMBER 18TH, AND THIS WILL BE
PAIRED WITH -- WE TALKED LAST
TIME ABOUT A PROGRAM THAT'S
BEING DEVELOPED BY SEDELA BL ACH
AND COLLEAGUES WHICH WILL ALLOW
INSTITUTIONS FUND TO DO
DIFFERENT CAPACITY BUILDING
ACTIVITIES.
SO THIS, THE S10 THAT I TOLD YOU
ABOUT JUST A MINUTE AGO, ALL ARE
KIND OF A PART OF A PACKAGE TO
HELP UNDERRESOURCED INSTITUTIONS
BUILD THEIR RESEARCH AND
EDUCATIONAL CAPACITIES.
SO I'M REALLY PLEASED BY THAT.
IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME COMING,
WE'VE BEEN WORKING REALLY HARD
ON THIS, BUT NOW TO SEE THESE
NOFOs COMING OUT IS REALLY
EXCITING AND I THINK IT'S GOING
TO BE VERY IMPACTFUL IN TERMS OF
DEVELOPING MANY INSTITUTIONS
ACROSS THE COUNTRY IN TERMS OF
THEIR ABILITY TO SPONSOR
RESEARCH AND TRAIN STUDENTS MORE
EFFICIENTLY.
FINALLY, UNITE HAS ALSO
DEVELOPED A PRIZE TO RECOGNIZE
INSTITUTIONS THAT HAVE DONE
EXCEPTIONAL THINGS TO PROMOTE
DEIA.
THIS IS TO GIVE SORT OF A CARROT
IN ADDITION TO VARIOUS PUSHES IN
THE SYSTEM.
SO THIS WILL RECOGNIZE
SUCCESSFUL INITIATIVES AT
ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS THAT HAVE
HELPED TO CREATE INCLUSIVE AND
SUPPORTIVE ENVIRONMENTS TO
PROMOTE DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND
INCLUSION AND ACCESSIBILITY.
THERE WILL BE UP TO 10 PRIZES
GIVEN, EACH FOR AROUND $100,000,
AND YOU CAN LEARN MORE BY GOING
TO THAT WEBSITE.
AND THE IDEA HERE IS, AGAIN,
JUST TO RECOGNIZE EXCELLENCE AT
INSTITUTIONS TO HELP THROUGH
THAT RECOGNITION TO DISSEMINATE
BEST PRACTICES IN DEIA, AND THEN
TO CREATE A LITTLE BIT OF
HEALTHY COMPETITION.
I THINK ONCE INSTITUTIONS SEE
THEIR PEERS WINNING THESE
PRIZES, THEY WILL ALSO WANT TO
WIN THESE PRIZES AND PUT IT UP
ON THEIR WEBSITES AND USE IT FOR
RECRUITMENT PURPOSES, ET CETERA.
SO HOPEFULLY THIS WILL BE A
POSITIVE FOR THE WHOLE
ECOSYSTEM.
UNITE HAS ALSO HELPED PUSH
FORWARD AN IMPORTANT POLICY
UPDATE I WANTED TO MAKE YOU
AWARE OF, WHICH IS THAT IT IS
NOW A REQUIREMENT FOR ALL NIH
GRANTEE INSTITUTIONS TO HAVE
BEHAVIORAL CODES OF CONDUCT.
AND THIS IS SOMETHING YOU MIGHT
HAVE THOUGHT WAS ALREADY TRUE
BUT TURNS OUT WE ONLY HAD A
REQUIREMENT FOR CODES OF CONDUCT
IN TERMS OF FINANCIAL CONFLICT
OF INTEREST.
SO NOW THAT'S BEEN EXPANDED,
THIS IS PART OF THE GRANTS
POLICY STATEMENT WHICH MEANS
THAT IT IS A CONDITION OF AWARD
SO WHEN IT'S GIVEN THE
INSTITUTION HAS TO HAVE A
BEHAVIORAL CODE OF CONDUCT THAT
COVERS THINGS SUCH AS THAT THE
ENVIRONMENTS ARE FREE OF
DISCRIMINATORY HARASSMENT AND
ARE SAFE AND CO CONDUCIVE TO HIH
QUALITY WORK.
WE HOPE ALL OUR INSTITUTIONS A
ALREADY HAVE THAT BUT THIS IS AN
ASSURANCE THAT THEY DO AND THAT
THEY TAKE A SECOND LOOK TO MAKE
SURE THEY'RE ADEQUATE, BUT IT
ALSO GIVES NIH MORE THAN OF A MR
WHEN THINGS GO WRONG SO IF THERE
ARE ALLEGATIONS OF HARASSMENT OR
DISCRIMINATION IT'S NOW IN THE
TERMS OF CONDITION OF AWARD THAT
THEY HAVE TO HAVE THESE CODES OF
CONDUCT AND THEY HAVE TO BE
FOLLOWING THEM.
SO IF THEY'RE NOT, WE HAVE MORE
LEGAL LEVERS TO PULL.
SO I THINK THAT'S ALSO AN
IMPORTANT UPDATE AND I HOPE
YOU'LL HELP US SPREAD THE WORD
THAT THAT IS NOW THE CASE.
I WANT TO TELL YOU ABOUT AN
INITIATIVE THAT'S BEEN GOING ON
LED BY THE CENTER FOR SCIENTIFIC
REVIEW RELATED TO FELLOWSHIP
APPLICATIONS.
THE NATIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE
AWARD FELLOWSHIP APPLICATIONS.
THE BACKGROUND HERE IS THAT
THERE HAVE BEEN PERSISTENT
CONCERNS AND WE AT NIGMS HAVE
SHARED THESE CONCERNS FOR A LONG
TIME, THAT THE WAY FELLOWSHIPS
ARE CONSTRUCTED AND THE REVIEW
IS DONE DISADVANTAGES MANY
HIGHLY QUALIFIED PROMTIONING PRG
APPLICANTS BECAUSE THE REVIEWS
REALLY FOCUS ON ISSUES OF
PEDIGREE AND INSTITUTIONAL
RECOGNITION, YOU KNOW, THE
QUOTE-UNQUOTE ELITENESS OF AN
INSTITUTION, HOW MUCH FUNDING
INVESTIGATORS HAVE AND THINGS OF
THAT NATURE.
RATHER THAN ON HOW MUCH PROMISE
THE INDIVIDUAL IN QUESTION HAS.
AND SO CSR HEARD THESE CONCERNS,
THEY PUT TOGETHER A WORKING
GROUP OF THEIR COUNCIL TO LOOK
AT THIS, AND ACTUALLY ALISON
GAMMI, I THINK KENNEDY GIBBS
WERE BOTH INVOLVED IN THIS, THEY
LOOKED AT A LOT OF DATA AND THE
DATA SUPPORT THIS CONTENTION
THAT MANY PEOPLE HAVE ABOUT THE
BIASED NATURE OF THE REVIEWS.
WHAT THEY FOUND WAS A SMALL
NUMBER OF INSTITUTIONS SUBMIT A
MAJORITY OF THE APPLICATIONS,
AND WHEN THEY DO, THEIRS DO
SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER IN REVIEW
AND ALSO APPLICATIONS IN WHICH
THE SPONSOR OF THE FELLOW IS
SENIOR AND HAS SIGNIFICANT
FUNDING ALSO DO BETTER IN
REVIEW.
SO THOSE ARE OUR KIND OF HARD
BAKED BIASES IN THE SYSTEM.
THEY PUT OUT A BLOG TELLING THE
COMMUNITY ABOUT THESE DATA AND
INVITING PEOPLE TO PUT IN
COMMENTS, AND THE STRONG
CONSENSUS FROM THE COMMENTS WAS
THAT THE COMMUNITY FELT THAT
THERE WERE BIAS THAT FAVOR
WELL-FUNDED LABS AND SENIOR
SCIENTISTS AT WELL-FUNDED
INSTITUTIONS.
SO THE WORKING GROUP'S
CONCLUSION WAS THAT NIH IS
PROBABLY LEAVING OUT A LOT OF
PROMISING TALENT BECAUSE OF THE
WAY THIS FELLOWSHIP REVIEW
SKEWS, AND THAT SOMETHING NEEDED
TO BE DONE TO MAKE IT A MORE
EVEN PLAYING FIELD.
SO THE MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS
WERE TO REVISE THE REVIEW
CRITERIA AND TO REVISE THE
FELLOWSHIP APPLICATION ITSELF TO
ALIGN WITH THOSE REVIEW
CRITERIA.
SO THE MAJOR MODIFICATIONS ARE
THAT THEY WANT TO FOCUS THE
REVIEWER'S ATTENTION ON THREE
KEY THINGS: THE POTENTIAL OF
THE APPLICANT, THE STRENGTH OF
THE SCIENCE THAT THE APPLICANT
IS GOING TO CONDUCT, AND THE
QUALITY OF THE TRAINING PLAN
SPECIFIC TO THAT APPLICANT.
NOT JUST SORT OF IN GENERAL BUT
SPECIFIC TO THAT M AL CAN'T.
SO THEY WANT TO FIND THE
CRITERIA TO FOCUS ON THE
APPLICANT'S POTENTIAL BY
EVALUATING THE PERSON'S
ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND THEIR
TRAJECTORY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE
OPPORTUNITY THAT THAT APPLICANT
HAS HAD.
SO THESE THINGS ARE VERY
CONTEXT-DEPENDENT.
IF YOU WENT TO A SMALL LIBERAL
ARTS COLLEGE, YOU'RE GOING TO
HAVE DIFFERENT OPPORTUNITIES
PRESENTED THAN IF YOU WENT TO A
MAJOR RESEARCH INSTITUTION FOR
YOUR UNDERGRADUATE.
SO THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME TAKING
INTO ACCOUNT OF THE DIFFERENT
OPPORTUNITIES PEOPLE HAVE WHEN
YOU'RE ASSESSING THEIR
POTENTIAL.
AND IN ADDITION TO
ACCOMPLISHMENTS, THEY WANT TO
EVALUATE PERSONAL
CHARACTERISTICS THAT CONTRIBUTE
TO SUCCESS.
SO WE TALK A LOT ABOUT THINGS
LIKE GRIT AND DETERMINATION AND
PERSEVERANCE, SO LOOKING FOR
WAYS TO MEASURE THAT IS GOING TO
BE IMPORTANT IN THIS PROCESS.
THEY WANT TO REDUCE THE BIAS IN
REVIEW BY REDUCING INAPPROPRIATE
CONSIDERATION OF THE SPONSOR,
HOW MUCH FUNDING THE SPONSOR
HAS, HOW MANY PEOPLE THE SPONSOR
HAS TRAINED, AS WELL AS THE
INSTITUTIONAL REPUTATION.
AGAIN, THIS IS ABOUT THE
POTENTIAL OF THE FELLOW AND
SHOULD NOT BE ABOUT HOW FAMOUS
THE INSTITUTION IS OR HOW FAMOUS
THE SPONSOR IS.
SO THEY ALSO WANT TO EMPHASIZE
APPLICANTS' SCIENTIFIC THINKING,
THEIR NEEDS, THEIR GOALS, AND A
BROADER STATEMENT OF
QUALIFICATIONS, SO THOSE WILL
ALL BE NOW PARTS OF THE
APPLICATION VERY MUCH EMPHASIZED
WHEREAS GRADES WHICH PREVIOUSLY
WERE ACQUIRED IN THE
APPLICATION, THEIR UNDERGRADUATE
GRADES IF THEY'RE APPLYING FOR A
GRADUATE FELLOWSHIP OR GRADUATE
GRADES IF THEY'RE APPLYING FOR A
POSTDOCTORAL FELLOWSHIP WILL NOT
BE REQUIRED AND ACTUALLY WON'T
BE ACCEPTED ANYMORE.
THAT SEEMED TO BE VERY BROADLY
AGREED THAT BY THE TIME YOU'RE
AT THIS STAGE, WHAT YOUR
UNDERGRADUATE GRADES WERE OR
WHAT YOUR GRADUATE GRADES WERE
ARE NOT THE KEY ISSUE.
THEY WANT GREATER EMPHASIS ON
THE SPONSOR'S MENTORSHIP
APPROACHES AND PLAN FOR, AGAIN,
FOR THIS PARTICULAR STUDENT.
NOT JUST A GENERAL STATEMENT OF
THIS IS HOW I APPROACH
MENTORING, BUT WHAT DOES THIS
STUDENT NEED, HOW WILL I HELP
THIS PARTICULAR STUDENT ACHIEVE
THEIR GOALS AND WHAT'S THE PLAN
TO DO THAT.
AND THE LETTERS OF SUPPORT WILL
BE TARGETED -- AND HAVE TARGETED
TRAINEE-SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.
SO WE KNOW FROM THE LITERATURE
ON LETTERS OF SUPPORT THAT THE
MORE DEFINED THEY CAN BE, THE
MORE RUBRIC-LIKE CAN BE, THE
MORE ONE CAN REDUCE BIAS AND I
THINK THAT'S THE IDEA HERE.
THERE'S ALSO GOING TO BE AN
OPTIONAL STATEMENT FOR SPECIAL
CIRCUMSTANCES.
THOSE CAN BE THINGS LIKE
HARASSMENT THAT HAPPENED TO THE
TRAINEE AT SOME MOINT IN THEIR R
CAREER, THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC,
THEIR FAMILY, THAT WILL BE
CONSIDERED IN THE PEER REVIEW
PROCESS AS A FACTOR.
SO HOPEFULLY THIS WILL HELP EVEN
THE PLANNING FIELD, LESSEN THOSE
BIASES AND GET US A BROADER POOL
OF HIGHLY TALENTED INDIVIDUALS
TO SUPPORT WITH FELLOWSHIPS.
CSR IS SEEKING YOUR INPUT.
THEY'VE PUT OUT A REQUEST FOR
INFORMATION ON THESE CHANGES, SO
YOU CAN GO TO THAT NOT-OD-23-110
AND FIND OUT INFORMATION.
RESPONSES ARE DUE JUNE 23RD SO
STILL PLENTY OF TIME.
I HOPE YOU'LL RESPOND AS
INDIVIDUALS OR GET YOUR
INSTITUTION TO RESPOND.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, THEY
HAVE AN EMAIL ADDRESS SET UP FOR
THAT.
OKAY.
NOW THIS IS THE TIME OF YEAR
WHEN I TELL YOU ABOUT WHAT
HAPPENED IN THE LAST FISCAL YEAR
IN TERMS OF FUNDING.
SO I WILL DO THAT.
BUT I DO WANT TO POINT OUT TO
YOU THAT WE HAVE A FEEDBACK LOOP
POST UP ABOUT ALL THIS AND YOU
GET A LOT MORE INFORMATION, A
LOT MORE GRANULARITY IF YOU GO
TO THAT.
BUT I'M JUST GOING TO GIVE YOU
AN OVERVIEW.
I'M GOING TO START WITH THE
EARLY STAGE INVESTIGATORS, SO AS
YOU PROBABLY REMEMBER A KEY GOAL
OF OUR STRATEGIC PLAN IS TO
ENHANCE OUR SUPPORT FOR EARLY
STAGE INVESTIGATORS BECAUSE
THAT'S THE FUTURE OF SCIENCE.
AND THIS SHOWS THE NUMBER OF
EARLY STAGE INVESTIGATORS THAT
NIGMS FUNDED, NEW EARLY STAGE
INVESTIGATOR GRANTS EACH YEAR,
SO THESE ARE COMPETING GRANTS.
2013 TO 2022.
YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE HAS BEEN
A STRONG STEADY GROWTH FROM
ABOUT 90 TO OVER 300 LAST FISCAL
YEAR.
SO THREE FOLD INCREASE IN THE
NUMBER WE'VE FUNDED IN THAT
PERIOD.
AND SINCE THE START OF MIRA, THE
FIRST MIRA GRANTS WERE IN AGAIN
16, WE'VE NEARLY DOUBLED THE
NUMBER OF INVESTIGATORS WE'RE
FUNDING EACH YEAR SO REALLY
QUITE IMPRESSIVE.
WHEN WE LOOK AT THE AWARDS MADE,
FISCAL YEAR 2022, 31 R01s
GIVEN TO EARLY STAGE
INVESTIGATORS.
268 MIRAs, R35s, AND 20
DP2 NEW INNOVATOR AWARDS.
SO 85% OF THE EARLY STAGE
INVESTIGATORS WE FUNDED LAST
YEAR WERE FUNDED THROUGH MIRA,
AND FROM THE START OF THE
PROGRAM, THIS HAS BEEN GROWING,
STARTED OUT ABOUT 50%, NOW IT'S
85%.
AND SO IN THAT SAME TIME, AS I
SAID WE'VE DOUBLED THE NUMBER OF
AWARDEES, BUT ALSO HAD A SORT OF
SIMILAR INCREASE IN THE NUMBER
OF APPLICANTS FROM EARLY STAGE
INVESTIGATORS.
SO THE MIRA PROGRAM DOES APPEAR
TO HAVE BEEN TRANSFORMATIVE IN
TERMS OF HOW MANY EARLY STAGE
INVESTIGATORS ARE BOTH APPLYING
AND GETTING FUNDED BY NIGMS.
ANOTHER METRIC WE FOCUS ON, AND
THIS IS AGAIN PART OF OUR
STRATEGIC PLAN, IS THE NUMBER OF
PEOPLE WHO WANT TO BE FUNDED BY
NIGMS, WHO ARE FUNDED BY NIGMS.
AND WE USE SOMETHING CALLED THE
CUMULATIVE INVESTIGATOR RATE TO
LOOK AT THIS.
STHIS IN EACH FISCAL YEAR SHOWS
THE PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO
EITHER APPLIED FOR AN NIGMS
RESEARCH GRANT IN THAT FISCAL
YEAR OR IN THE PRECEDING FOUR
FISCAL YEARS, WHO HAVE AT LEAST
ONE NIGMS RESEARCH GRANT.
SO AGAIN, IT'S THE PERCENTAGE OF
PEOPLE WHO WANT TO BE FUNDED BY
NIGMS WHO ARE FUNDED BY NIGMS.
AND SINCE 2013, THIS HAS GONE
FROM ABOUT 33% TO ABOUT 45%.
SO ABOUT 45% OF THE PEOPLE LAST
FISCAL YEAR WHO WANTED AN NIGMS
GRANT HAD AT LEAST ONE NIGMS
GRANT.
AND YOU CAN SEE THAT STEADY
GROWTH IN THAT.
AND AGAIN, THAT'S PART OF OUR
STRATEGIC PLAN, IS FOCUSING ON
FUNDING MORE INVESTIGATORS
BECAUSE THE INVESTIGATORS ARE
THE ONES WITH THE IDEAS, THEY'RE
DRIVING THE INNOVATION, THEY'RE
DRIVING THE SCIENCE FORWARD, SO
FUNDING MORE PEOPLE IS GOING TO
GET US MORE IDEAS, MORE
INNOVATION, AND MORE SCIENCE
PRODUCTIVITY DONE.
WE ARE, IN FACT, I THINK MEETING
THE GOAL OF OUR STRATEGIC PLAN
IN THAT RESPECT.
THE OTHER THING WE ALWAYS
TRADITIONALLY LOOK AT IS AN
APPLICATION-BASED METRIC, SO
THIS IS COMPETING RESEARCH GRANT
SUCCESS RATE.
RPGs OR R01s, MIRAs, ET
CETERA.
YOU CAN LOOK UP ONLINE WHAT THE
NUMBER OF GRANTS ARE.
BUT THESE ARE BASICALLY OUR POOL
OF RESEARCH GRANTS.
THE SUCCESS RATE IS THE -- IN
EACH FISCAL YEAR IS THE NUMBER
OF APPLICATIONS THAT GOT FUNDED
DIVIDED BY THE NUMBER OF UNIQUE
APPLICATIONS.
AND SO IN 2013, THAT WAS 20%.
IT'S GROWN NOW IN 2022 TO BE
ALMOST 36%, SO REALLY STRONG
GROWTH IN THE SUCCESS RATE FOR
RESEARCH PROJECT GRANTS.
THAT'S ABOUT WHERE WE WANT IT,
I'D SAY LOW 30s, MID 30s IS
A VERY HEALTHY POINT FOR THE
SUCCESS RATE TO BE.
AND SO WE'RE PRETTY HAPPY WITH
THAT AND HOPE TO BE ABLE TO
MAINTAIN IT SOMEWHERE IN THAT
VICINITY.
AND THEN FINALLY, IF WE LOOK AT
OUR OVERALL MIRA POOL, SO ONE OF
OUR STRATEGIC GOALS IN OUR
STRATEGIC PLAN IS TO, BY 2025,
HAVE 60% OF OUR R01 EQUIVALENT
GRANTS BE MIRAs.
AND SO THE PROGRAM STARTED
FUNDING IN 2016, SO IN 2015, BY
DEFINITION, THERE WERE 0%
MIRAs IN THAT POOL.
BY 2022, WE'RE UP TO 48%.
AND YOU CAN SEE THIS HAS BEEN
GROWING BASICALLY LINEARLY EVERY
YEAR OF THE PROGRAM.
SO WE ARE WELL ON TRACK TO BY
2025 HAVE THAT 60% MARK.
IN FACT, IF ALL GOES ACCORDING
TO THIS LINE, I THINK IN 2024,
WE SHOULD PROBABLY HIT IT.
SO WE'RE ON TRACK, AND IT REALLY
DOES SEEM TO BE TAKING OFF THE
WAY WE HOPED IT WOULD, AND THE
MORE PERCENTAGE WE HAVE, THE
MORE TRANSFORMATIVE THIS PROGRAM
IS GOING TO BE.
AND SO 60% IS OUR TARGET BUT I
HOPE IT'S GOING TO GROW SOMEWHAT
PAST THAT AT LEAST.
SO I JUST WANTED TO END, WE HAD
A DISCUSSION MAYBE THE LAST
COUNCIL OR THE COUNCIL BEFORE
ABOUT HOW NIGMS COULD MORE
EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATE WITH OUR
CONSTITUENTS, WHETHER THEY BE
RESEARCHERS, TRAINEES, THE
GENERAL PUBLIC, OR OTHERS.
SO I WANT TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE
BIT OF AN UPDATE ON HOW WE'RE
THINKING ABOUT THAT NOW AND GIVE
YOU SOMETHING TO REACT TO.
AT SOME LEVEL THE MESSAGE IS
WE'RE GOING BACK TO THE FUTURE.
AND HISTORICALLY, THE FEEDBACK
LOOP BLOG HAS BEEN OUR MAIN WAY
OF COMMUNICATING WITH THE
COMMUNITY.
IT A PLACE WHERE THERE'S A
PERMANENT -- ESSENTIALLY
PERMANENT RECORD OF WHAT WE
SAID.
PEOPLE CAN MAKE COMMENTS IF THEY
WANT, WE CAN RESPOND TO THOSE
COMMENTS IF IT'S APPROPRIATE.
AND WE HAVE A FORMAT WHERE WE
CAN INCLUDE DATA, HAVE A LONGER
DISCUSSION OF THE ISSUES AND OUR
RATIONALE FOR DOING THINGS.
SO WE ARE KIND OF DOUBLING DOWN
ON THAT.
WE THINK THAT THIS REALLY IS THE
BEST WAY FOR US TO GET
INFORMATION TO THE COMMUNITY.
WE CAN PUSH THESE OUT BY EMAILS
TO ALL OF OUR GRANTEES, ALL OF
OUR RECENT APPLICANTS, ALL OF
OUR TRAINEES IF WE WANT TO.
PEOPLE CAN SIGN UP TO RECEIVE
EITHER DIGESTS OF THE POSTS OR
EACH ONE AS THEY COME OUT.
SO WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE USING
THIS AS OUR PRIMARY MODE OF
COMMUNICATION ALONG WITH THOSE
EMAILS.
I KNOW THAT SOUNDS SOMEWHAT
RETRO, BUT IT DOES SEEM TO US TO
BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO GET
INFORMATION OUT.
IN TERMS OF SOCIAL MEDIA, WE'RE
LAUNCHING A NEW INITIATIVE TO
INCREASE OUR USE OF LINKEDIN, SO
WE NOW HAVE OUR OWN LINKEDIN
PAGE THAT WE'VE RECENTLY
LAUNCHED.
IT'S ACTUALLY GONE UP BY 50% IN
TERMS OF THE META FOLLOWERS
SINCE WE DID A SOFT LAUNCH OF
IT.
WE'RE GOING TO START A HARDER
LAUNCH BASICALLY WITH THIS
PRESENTATION IN COUNCIL, WE'LL
BE TRYING TO AMP UP THE
PUBLICITY -- THIS IS THE SECOND
MAJOR MODE OF COMMUNICATION
WE'RE GOING TO BE USING.
IT'S A WAY TO SHARE INFORMATION
ON THINGS LIKE FUNDING
OPPORTUNITIES, JOB
ANNOUNCEMENTS, EDUCATION
RESOURCES, FOCUSES THAT WE WRITE
ON WREE SEARCHERS THEMSELVES.
IT'S A PROFESSIONAL PLATFORM, SO
IT HAS AN AUDIENCE THAT WE HOPE
WE'LL BE ABLE TO APPROPRIATELY
ENGAGE WITH, AND WE ENCOURAGE
ALL OF YOU, IF YOU HAVE LINKEDIN
ACCOUNTS, TO BECOME OUR FRIENDS
OR WHATEVER IT'S CALLED ON
LINKEDIN, I DON'T KNOW, AND SEE
HOW THAT'S WORKING.
WE'D LOVE YOUR FEEDBACK ON HOW
WE CAN MORE EFFECTIVELY USE THIS
PLATFORM.
SO JUST TO END AND OPEN THE
DISCUSSION, HERE ARE A COUPLE OF
QUESTIONS THAT I'D CERTAINLY
VALUE YOUR INPUT ON THAT ARE
TIMELY AND TOPICAL, BUT ANYTHING
YOU WANT TO DISCUSS THAT I'VE
TALKED ABOUT OR OTHER ISSUES
YOU'D LIKE TO BRING UP ARE ALL
THINGS WE'D LIKE TO HEAR ABOUT.
THE FIRST, HOW SHOULD WE DEAL
WITH THE GROWING COST OF DATA
STORAGE?
WE'RE IN THIS MASSIVE DAY A
GROWTH ENVIRONMENT WHERE DATA
ARE BECOMING MORE AND MORE
IMPORTANT.
YOU'RE SEEING GENERATIVE A.I.
AND THEIR USE OF DATA.
OBVIOUSLY THIS IS GOING TO
BECOME INCREASINGLY IMPORTANT,
BUT THE FACT IS THAT THE COST OF
DATA STORAGE IS NOT DECREASING
AT THE SAME RATE AS THE AMOUNT
OF DATA IS INCREASING.
SO THE COSTS ARE GOING UPMENT
THEY'RE ACTUALLY GOING UP
POSSIBLY EXPONENTIALLY, AND
NOTHING CAN SURVIVE WITH
EXPONENTIAL COST INCREASE,
RIGHT?
SO WE REALLY NEED TO THINK ABOUT
WAYS THAT WE CAN MORE EFFICI
EFFICIENTLY STORE DATA AND A WAY
WE CAN DECIDE WHAT DATA ACTUALLY
NEED TO BE STORED IN THE LONG
TERM AND WHEN WE CAN MAYBE, YOU
KNOW, DECOMMISSION DATA SO TO
SPEAK.
ONE USEFUL EXAMPLE THAT WE'RE
DEALING WITH IN REALTIME IS
SEQUENCE READ ARCHIVE THAT NCBI
RUNS, WHICH IS WHERE THE RAW
SEQUENCE READS FROM LARGE
SEQUENCING EXPERIMENTS GO, BOTH
HUMAN AND NON-HUMAN, AND THE
COSTS OF THOSE ARE GROWING AT
LEAST LINEARLY, POSSIBLY
EXPONENTIALLY, AT AN
INTERESTING -- SOME INTERESTING
ISSUES ARE WHO'S USING THESE
DATA, HOW USEFUL ARE THEY FOR
THE OVERALL COMMUNITY, HOW LONG
SHOULD THEY BE STORED, WHEN IS
IT BETTER TO JUST REGENERATE THE
DATA BECAUSE THE COSTS ARE LESS
THAN STORING THE DATA, IS A
QUESTION THAT I THINK WE'RE
WRESTLING WITH, AND FINALLY,
WITH SRA, AN INTERESTING FEATURE
OF IT IS THAT THE REAL COST OF
THE DATA IS NOT THE ACTUAL
SEQUENCE THEMSELVES, IT'S THE
METADATA ASSOCIATED WITH THE
SEQUENCES.
AND SO THAT'S AN INTERESTING
NUANCE TO THINK ABOUT, HOW DO
YOU DECIDE WHAT METADATA TO
KEEP.
THEN BUILDING OFF OF THAT, WE'VE
TALKED LAST TIME ABOUT THE DATA
MANAGEMENT AND SHARING POLICY
THAT JUST BECAME ACTIVE, AND
WE'VE PUT OUT SOME GUIDANCE THAT
I'M POINTING YOU TO HERE ABOUT
HOW NIGMS IS APPROACHING THIS
NEW DATA MANAGEMENT SHARING
POLICY AND WHAT OUR EXPECTATIONS
ARE, BUT I'M VERY CURIOUS TO
HEAR ON THE GROUND WHAT ARE YOU
HEARING FROM THE COMMUNITY, WHAT
ARE THE CHALLENGES, WHAT ARE THE
PAIN POINT, WHAT'S WORKING, WHAT
ISN'T WORKING.
SO I'D LOVE TO HEAR YOUR
FEEDBACK ON THAT.
AND THAT IS ALL.
WE CAN OPEN THE FLOOR TO
DISCUSSION.
SO, QUESTIONS, COMMENTS,
THOUGHTS?
I THINK WE HAVE SOME TIME.
TERRI.
>>SO YOU SHARED SOME VERY
POSITIVE DATA.
AS YOU LOOK AT THE GRANTS
FUNDING OVER THE LAST YEAR, WERE
THERE ANY PLACES WHERE YOU WERE
DISAPPOINTED, WHERE YOU THOUGHT
WE WERE MAKING PROGRESS IN TERMS
OF FUNDING OR FAIRNESS OR
HOWEVER YOU WANT TO THINK ABOUT
IT THAT NEED MORE WORK?
>>I GO BACK TO THE FELLOWSHIPS
AGAIN, AND YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE
SPACE OF INDIVIDUAL AWARDS NOT
INCLUDING, SAY, MOSAIC WHICH ARE
FOCUSED ON DIVERSITY AND
BRINGING IN MORE PEOPLE, BUT THE
REGULAR FELLOWSHIPS, THE REGULAR
K99s, THEY ARE ALL GOING TO
THE SAME INSTITUTIONS.
THEY ARE MOSTLY GOING TO VERY
WELL-FUNDED LABS IN THOSE
INSTITUTIONS.
AND SO I THINK THIS PROCESS OF
RE-THINKING THEM IS REALLY
IMPORTANT.
WE'VE IN THE PAST LOOKED AT THE
CURVES FOR INSTITUTIONS VERSUS
NIH FUNDING VERSUS WHO'S GETTING
THOSE AWARDS, AND FELLOWSHIPS
ARE THE MOST SKEWED, THEY'RE
EVEN MORE SKEWED THAN R01s ARE
IN TERMS OF THEY ALMOST
EXCLUSIVELY GO TO THE TOP 25 IN
TERMS OF NIH FUNDING.
SO I'M GLAD THAT CSR IS TAKING
THIS ON.
I THINK IT WILL BE CHALLENGING
BUT I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT
THAT WE WORK ON THAT.
>>THANK YOU.
>>WENDY.
>>I REALLY LIKE THE UNITE PRIZE
AWARDS.
I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA TO
GET HEALTHY COMPETITION.
I JUST HAD A CURIOSITY QUESTION.
HOW CAN YOU USE THE PRIZE MONEY?
ARE THERE RULES AROUND THAT?
>>THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION.
YOU KNOW, I HAVE TO LOOK EXACTLY
WHAT THE RULES ARE, BUT IT'S
FAIRLY BROAD AS TO WHAT YOU CAN
USE IT FOR.
I DON'T THINK YOU COULD BUY A
YACHT WITH A PROBABLY, BUT I
THINK WITHIN THE CONFINES OF
THINGS THAT ARE TYPICALLY
ACCEPTABLE, THEY COULD -- THE
INSTITUTION HAS PRETTY BROAD
DISCRETION OF WHAT THEY DO WITH
IT.
>>JUST A NOTE REAL QUICK.
WHEN YOU'RE ASKING QUESTION, IT
WOULD BE HELPFUL IF YOU FACE THE
MICROPHONE.
IT'S NOT TRANSLATING WELL
ONLINE.
THEY CAN'T HEAR YOU.
SO I KNOW YOU WANT TO LOOK AT
JON WHEN YOU ASK IT --
>>MAYBE I SHOULD SIT DOWN, THAT
MIGHT MAKE IT EASIER.
I'M GOING TO GO OVER AND SIT
DOWN.
OKAY.
MORE QUESTIONS, THOUGHTS.
JULIA.
>>I'LL KEEP US GOING IN ORDER
HERE.
I JUST WANT TO VOICE MY SUPPORT
AS A NEWER PERSON RUNNING A LAB
FOR THE CHANGES TO THE
FELLOWSHIP GUIDELINES.
THAT WILL HAVE, I THINK, A HUGE
IMPACT ON NEWER LABS ALSO,
BECAUSE I'VE FOUND THE REVIEW
CRITERIA DISCOURAGING, YOU KNOW,
IN TERMS OF PEOPLE I WORK WITH
APPLYING FROM MY LAB, THINKING
ABOUT THEIR CHANCES OF GETTING
FUNDING, AND IT WOULD ALSO BE
HELPFUL, I SUSPECT, FOR OTHER
PEOPLE LIKE ME, THOSE TYPES OF
GUIDELINES WERE CLARIFIED FOR
SUPPLEMENTS ALSO, SO LIKE THE
DIVERSITY SUPPLEMENTS, FOR
EXAMPLE, HAVE -- IN THE REQUEST,
THEY SAY THINGS ABOUT, LIKE, YOU
KNOW, CONFIRMING THAT THE MENTOR
HAS SUCCESSFULLY MENTORED PEOPLE
TO FUTURE CAREERS AND IS
ACCOMPLISHED AND ALL OF THAT, SO
THINGS LIKE THAT ALSO CAN MAKE
ME AS A NEWER INVESTIGATOR FEEL
LIKE, OH, THIS IS PROBABLY
BEYOND THE REACH OF ANYONE FROM
MY LAB.
>>THAT'S AN EXCELLENT POINT,
AND I THINK WE SHOULD THINK
ABOUT THAT AS WELL.
WE'LL BRING THAT POINT ABOUT THE
DIVERSITY SUPPLEMENT NOFO -- WE
DON'T CONTROL IT, BUT WE CAN
BRING THAT TO NIH AND SEE IF WE
CAN GET THAT LANGUAGE MODIFIED
AS WELL.
IN GENERAL, WITH FELLOWSHIPS AND
WITH K AWARDS, I THINK THAT
POINT YOU MAKE ABOUT PEOPLE NOT
APPLYING BECAUSE THEY DON'T
THINK THEY'RE GOING TO GET IT IS
VERY TRUE.
SO AS I WAS SAYING, IT'S VERY
SKEWED TOWARDS THE TOP 25 NIH
FUNDED INSTITUTIONS, BUT IF YOU
LOOK AT APPLICATIONS, THE OTHER
INSTITUTIONS AREN'T EVEN
APPLYING.
PRESUMABLY BECAUSE THEY DON'T
THINK THEY'RE GOING TO GET IT.
DANIELLE.
>>SO THIS IS SWITCHING ON TO
THE DATA THING.
THIS IS AN IGNORANT QUESTION,
BUT MY SENSE IS THAT THERE'S A
FAIR NUMBER OF NEW FIRMS THAT
ARE USING GENERATIVE A.I. TOOLS
TO DEVELOP PROTEINS, SO LIKE
CHAT GPT BUT FOR PROTEINS.
AND LIKE CHATGPT, WHAT IT DOES
IS IT WILL GO THROUGH ALL OF
REDDIT OR ALL OF WIKIPEDIA OR
SOMETHING AND TAKE THAT AS INPUT
TRAINING DATA OR REDDIT IS NOW
HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT
WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO
PROVIDE THAT DATA FOR FREE TO
ANOTHER COMPANY THAT'S GOING TO
DEVELOP SORT OF TOOLS ON TOP OF
THAT.
IS THAT -- DO WE HAVE A SENSE OF
WHETHER NIH SORT OF PAID FOR
DATABASES ARE BEING USED TO --
THESE THINGS AND IS THERE A
SENSE OF THINKING ABOUT ACCESS
TO THAT FOR COMMERCIAL USE?
>>ABSOLUTELY IN TERMS OF
PROGRAMS LIKE ALPHAFOLD, THAT
HAVE REALLY TRANSFORMED HOW WE
ARE ABLE TO PREDICT PROTEIN
STRUCTURE, MUCH OF THAT WAS
PREDICATED ON THE PROTEIN DATA
BANK AND ALL THE STRUCTURES THAT
WERE IN THERE AND, THEREFORE,
NIH FUNDED THE STRUCTURE
DETERMINATION, MUCH OF IT.
WE AT NIGMS ARE THE PRIMARY
FUNDER OF THE PROTEIN DATA BANK,
SO YES, OF COURSE THEY'RE PUBLIC
INFORMATION AND WE WANT TO BE
USED BOTH FOR PUBLIC RESEARCH
BUT ALSO FOR COMMERCIALIZATION.
SO --
>>I THINK IT'S USEFUL, ONE, TO
JUST -- ONE WAY IS TO THINK
ABOUT THIS AS THIS IS DATA THAT
WE'RE STORING AND IT'S AN
INVESTMENT THAT'S GENERATING
THESE SORT OF NEW TOOLS AND WE
SHOULD KEEP TRACK OF THAT.
OR ALSO IS THERE LIKE A USER FEE
THAT YOU COULD IMAGINE?
>>A USER FEE FOR ACCESS TO THE
DATA?
>>FOR USING TO TRAIN.
>>YES, THOSE ARE REALLY
INTERESTING QUESTIONS.
YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW, FOR
INSTANCE, THE PDB DOES NOT HAVE
A USER FEE.
IT'S FREE AND OPEN ACCESS FOR
ANYBODY, BUT THERE ARE DATA
RESOURCES THAT HAVE SUBSCRIPTION
FEES AND THOSE FEES CAN BE
DIFFERENT FOR INDUSTRY VERSUS,
YOU KNOW, ACADEMIC NON-PROFIT,
AND THOSE DISCUSSIONS ARE ALL
WRAPPED UP IN SOME OF THESE
ISSUES OF HOW DO WE SUPPORT AND
PAY FOR DATA STORAGE, SO YES.
LET'S SEE.
WE'LL GO TO DR. EYE VER SON.
>>FIRST OFF I'M SURE YOU'RE
AWARE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
CONVERSATIONS IN DIFFERENT
STATES REGARDING DEI PROGRAMS ON
COLLEGE CAMPUSES.
I'M JUST WONDERING IF NIH IS
ENGAGING IN THOSE CONVERSATIONS
IN ANY WAY.
>>WE'VE CERTAINLY DISCUSSED
INTERNALLY WHAT THEY MEAN FOR
OUR PROGRAMS.
WE DO NOT CONTROL STATE LAW, OF
COURSE, AND SO THE STATES AND
THE INSTITUTIONS ARE GOING TO
HAVE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE
STATE LAW MEANS IN TERMS OF WHAT
THEY CAN DO, I THINK IS, YOU
KNOW, WHERE WE ARE AT THIS
POINT.
>>YEAH, I THINK THAT THE IDEA
OF FEDERAL FUNDING I IS A VERY
POWERFUL ARGUMENT THAT
TRANSCENDS POLITICS SO IT'S AN
IMPORTANT ONE.
AND THE SECOND WITH REGARD TO
DATA STORAGE, AS YOU KNOW,
UNIVERSITY HAVE A LOT OF
RESOURCES HISTORICALLY THAT WERE
USED FOR LIBRARIES, PHYSICAL
LIBRARIES ARE NOT WHAT THEY USED
TO BE, AND SO I'M WONDERING IF
THERE'S ANY PROGRAMS YOU'RE
CONSIDERING THAT THINK ABOUT
THAT AS UNIVERSITY-LEVEL STORAGE
TYPE OF RESOURCES AND PROGRAMS
SPECIFICALLY THAT LIBRARIES
COULD APPLY FOR, FOR THIS
PURPOSE.
>>
>>A NUMBER OF SCHOOLS HAVE, I
ASSUMED, REPURPOSED SOME OF THE
MONEY THEY USED TO USE FOR THE
BRICK AND MORTAR PARTS OF THE
LIBRARY AND BUILT OUT THEIR OWN
DATA STORAGE PLATFORMS WITH,
AGAIN, I PRESUME SOME OF THAT
MONEY.
SO I THINK THAT'S A VERY
WORTHWHILE M MODEL IN TERMS OF
THIS DATA MANAGEMENT SHARING.
A CONCERN THERE IS IT HAS TO BE
STABLE ENOUGH TO BE MORE OR LESS
PERMANENT IF IT'S GOING TO -- IF
A NEW DEAN IS GOING TO COME IN
AND GET RID OF IT, THEN THAT
WASN'T VERY USEFUL, SO I THINK
THOSE ARE THINGS TO CONSIDER.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE THINKING
ABOUT?
>>I'M WONDERING IF LIBRARIES
CAN APPLY DIRECTLY FOR
PARTICULAR RESOURCES FROM NIH TO
DO THIS KIND OF THING IN THE
FUTURE.
>>THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION.
CERTAINLY WE COULD THINK ABOUT
IT WITH THE NATIO NATIONAL LIBRF
MEDICINE, WHICH HAS THE
STRONGEST CONNECTIONS WITH
ACADEMIC LIBRARIES ACROSS THE
COUNTRY.
AN INSTITUTION WHICH AS THE
LIBRARY CAN APPLY FOR WHATEVER
GRANTS NIH HAS SO IF THERE'S AN
APPROPRIATE FIT FOR WHAT YOU'RE
THINKING OF DOING IN TERMS OF
BUILDING A DATA RESOURCE OR
SOMETHING ELSE, THEN THE LIBRARY
COULD, I PRESUME, APPLY THROUGH
THE UNIVERSITY FOR THOSE THINGS.
LET'S SEE.
WE'LL GO TO THIS SIDE OF THE
TABLE.
PAOLA.
>>I HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS.
FOR THE REWARD, THE DIVERSITY
FOCUSED R01 GRANT, I WAS
WONDERING HOW YOU WILL EVALUATE
THE RESEARCH ACCOMPLISHMENTS,
BECAUSE IF THE APPLICANTS ARE
GOING TO HAVE DONE A LOT OF A.I,
THE AMOUNT OF PRODUCTIVITY IS
GOING TO BE LOWER SO IF IT'S
GOING TO BE AN R01, HOW WILL
THEY BE EVALUATED WITHOUT --
BECAUSE SURE, THEY DID THE A.I.,
NOW THEY QUALIFY, BUT THE MORE
D.I. THEY DID, PERHAPS THE LOWER
AMOUNT OF DATA.
>>SO THAT'S SPECIFICALLY PART
OF THE PROGRAM, IS THAT
RECOGNITION THAT BECAUSE THEY
WERE WORKING ON THE DEIA
ACTIVITIES, IT TOOK TIME AWAY
FROM THEIR RESEARCH ACTIVITIES.
THAT'S ACTUALLY ONE OF THE
THINGS THIS PROGRAM IS TRYING TO
TRY TO PAY BACK, IF YOU WILL.
SO THE REVIEW IS BEING CAREFULLY
WRITTEN AND CONSTRUCTED TO TAKE
THAT INTO ACCOUNT, THAT THEY
WILL HAVE SPENT TIME DOING THAT
INSTEAD OF THEIR RESEARCH AND,
THEREFORE, THE EXPECTATIONS NEED
TO BE SET ACCORDINGLY.
I BELIEVE WE WERE ALSO VERY
CAREFUL TO TALK ABOUT
INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT IN
EVALUATING PAST PRODUCTIVITY AND
FUTURE PLANS THAT DEPENDING ON
THE RESOURCES YOUR INSTITUTION
HAS, THE FIELD MAY BE SOMEWHAT
DIFFERENT AND THE REVIEWERS MAY
NEED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT
INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT WHEN
MAKING THEIR EVALUATIONS.
>>I THINK THE BALANCE, IT'S
GOING TO BE TRICKY BECAUSE THE
MORE DEI THEY DID, THE --
>>YES, ABSOLUTELY.
>>SO JUST TO KEEP THAT IN MIND,
I FEEL IT'S IMPORTANT.
>>ONE THING I'LL JUST MENTION
BEFORE YOU ASK YOUR NEXT
QUESTION IS THAT THESE WILL NOT
BE REVIEWED IN REGULAR R01 STUDY
SECTION, THEY WILL BE REVIEWED
BY THEMSELVES SO THE REVIEWERS
SHOULD BE ABLE TO FOCUS ON THIS
POOL OF APPLICANTS AND NOT BE
COMPARING TO EVERYONE ELSE WHO
WAS NOT DOING THOSE DEIA
ACTIVITIES.
>>FOR THE INNIN INSTITUTIONAL
EXCELLENCE, I THINK THAT'S
REALLY COOL, BUT HOW WILL
EXCELLENCE BE EVALUATED?
BECAUSE BEING PART OF A LOT OF
DEI COMMITTEES, THERE'S A LOT OF
DISCUSSION, BUT I FEEL WE NEED
TO DO THE NEXT STEP, WHICH IS
GOING TO REQUIRE WORK, IT'S NOT
GOING TO BE EASY, AND SOMETIMES
IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE FUNDS TO,
LIKE, I DON'T KNOW, GENERATE
MORE PROGRAMS, FOR INSTANCE, IN
THE SCIENCES, THE INTRO CLASSES
ARE LIKE THE WEEDING COURSES
WHICH I THINK IS A HORRIBLE
TERM, IT PUSHES AWAY A LOT OF
ESPECIALLY FIRST GENERATION AND
MINORITY STUDENTS.
AND SO I THINK IT'S GOING TO
REQUIRE PERHAPS ADDITIONAL
COURSES THAT CAN HELP THEM KEEP
UP WITH THE MATERIAL.
BUT THAT REQUIRES MONEY.
AND SO I WAS JUST WONDERING WHAT
EXCELLENCE, THE DEFINITION OF
EXCELLENCE, RIGHT?
>>I THINK THAT IS A SUBJECTIVE
TERM FOR SURE.
MY UNDERSTANDING, THIS IS BEING
RUN BY THE CHIEF OFFICER FOR
SCIENTIFIC WORKFORCE DIVERSITY'S
OFFICE, THEY'RE RUNNING THIS
PROGRAM, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS
THEY WILL BE FOCUSING ON
DEMONSTRATED IMPACT, SO IT'S NOT
YOU HAVE A PLAN THAT IS GOOD,
IT'S ITS YOU ACTUALLY DID
SOMETHING AND YOU HAVE DATA TO
SHOW THAT IT ACTUALLY WORKED.
IT IMPROVED THE CULTURE.
IT MADE THE INSTITUTION MORE
INCLUSIVE.
IT REDUCED HARASSMENT CASES,
WHATEVER IT IS YOU'RE GOING TO
BE LOOKING AT.
SO I THINK THAT IS HOW THEY WILL
BE JUDGING IT.
>>I REALLY LIKE IT.
SO IT'S AT EVERY LEVEL: STUDENT
RETENTION AND COMPLETION, I
THINK IS CRITICAL, COMPLETION.
>>EXACTLY.
>>DON'T JUST BRING THEM.
HELP THEM FINISH.
>>YES.
SO IT CAN BE WHATEVER THE
METRICS ARE THEY WANT TO PUT
FORWARD, THAT'S HOW IT WILL BE
JUDGED.
>>NICE.
ONE LAST COMMENT AND I JUST
WANTED TO AGREE THAT THOSE F31,
F32s, AS EARLY CAREERS,
THERE'S A QUESTION ABOUT THE
MENTORING RECORD, AND AS EARLY
CAREER, WE DON'T HAVE A RECORD.
AND SO WHAT I'VE HEARD IS THAT
YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CO-MENTOR,
AND SO YOU HAVE TO FIND A
CO-MENTOR.
SO I THINK ADDRESSING ALSO THE
MENTORS REQUIREMENTS.
>>AND ALISON CAN CORRECT ME IF
I'M WRONG, BUT I THINK THEY'RE
GOING TO GET RID OF THAT ENTIRE
THING ABOUT HAVING A CO-MENTOR.
IS THAT RIGHT, ALISON?
>>WE'RE IN THE IMPLEMENTATION
PHASE RIGHT NOW, SO JUST SORT OF
STARTING THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF
IT, SO WE'VE BEEN GIVEN THE
CHARGE FROM THE GROUP, AND WE'RE
REALLY TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW
TO OPERATIONALIZE THAT.
I THINK ONE OF THE THOUGHTS IS
WHAT WE'VE DONE AT NIGMS IS
TO -- IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW THE
MENTORING PHILOSOPHY AND THE
PERSPECTIVE, AND WITH THE
UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU MAY NOT
YET HAVE A CHANCE TO IMPLEMENT
IT, BUT THAT'S REALLY KEY AND AS
JOHN MENTIONED, IT'S KEY THAT
THE MENTORING PLAN IS
INDIVIDUALIZED FOR THAT
PARTICULAR PERSON, IT'S NOT JUST
A BOILERPLATE STANDARD STUFF
THAT SOUNDS GOOD TO REVIEW
PANELS.
SO THINGS ALONG THOSE LINES.
SO IT IS FIRST AND FOREMOST IN
OUR MINDS ABOUT HOW TO BEST DO
THAT AND NOT PENALIZE PEOPLE WHO
ARE EARLY STAGE.
SO WE'RE STILL WORKING THAT OUT.
>>THAT'S AWESOME.
THANK YOU.
>>BUT YOU SHOULD CERTAINLY BOTH
RIGHT IN TO THE RFI, I HOPE,
GIVE THAT FEEDBACK?
>>ABSOLUTELY, YES.
>>BECAUSE WE HAVE A PHILOSOPHY.
IT'S A GOOD PHILOSOPHY.
WE DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY WENT
BECAUSE THEY'RE STILL WITH US.
>>ABSOLUTELY.
AND TO BE FAIR, I KNOW EVERYBODY
KNOWS THIS, BUT JUST BECAUSE
YOU'VE HAD PEOPLE PASS THROUGH
YOUR LAB AND BE SUCCESSFUL DOES
NOT MEAN YOU WERE A GOOD MENTOR.
SO YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT PROOF OF
GOOD MENTORING EITHER.
SO WE JUST HAVE TO -- WE HAVE TO
FIGURE OUT HOW TO BEST DO THAT.
>>THANK YOU.
JUST A COMMENT, I REALLY LIKE A
LOT OF THESE IDEAS AND HOW NIH
IS MOVING FORWARD.
THANK YOU.
>>GREAT.
THANK YOU.
I THINK WE HAVE A FEW MORE
MINUTES FOR DISCUSSION.
LET'S GO TO MARK AND THEN WE'LL
GO TO DAVE.
>>THANK YOU.
JUST A COUPLE OF COMMENTS.
SO ONE, I REALLY LIKE THE
INSTRUMENTATION GRANT PROGRAM
THAT WAS MENTIONED AND THINK IT
COULD REALLY HAVE SIGNIFICANT
IMPACT FOR EARLY TRAINEES
ESPECIALLY, JUST LEARNING HOW TO
GENERATE DATA.
IT HELPS THEM BUILD CONFIDENCE
AS WELL.
A SUGGESTION I WOULD HAVE IS
WOULD THERE BE A WAY TO EITHER
MARKET THAT OR GET INTEREST FROM
AREAS LIKE COMMUNITY COLLEGES,
STATE UNIVERSITIES AND OTHER
INSTITUTIONS, THAT THEY, FOR
EXAMPLE, NOT HAVE THE TYPE OF
SOPHISTICATED EQUIPMENT THAT
LARGER UNIVERSITIES DO SO THAT
WOULD BE A SUGGESTION.
MY SECOND SUGGESTION, I REALLY
LIKE THE UNITED PRIZE AWARD THAT
WAS MENTIONED AND REALIZE THAT
THIS IS JUST GETTING OFF THE
GROUND, BUT MY SUGGESTION WOULD
BE IS AT SOME POINT IN THE
FUTURE, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO
EXPAND EITHER THE APPLICANTS OR
THE GRANTEES TO INCLUDE NOT ONLY
THE ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS AND
MAYBE THE SMALL BUSINESS
CONCERNS AND OTHER AREAS AS
WELL.
THE REASON WHY I'M MAKING THAT
SUGGESTION IS IT'S GOING TO TAKE
ALL OF US, BOTH IN ACADEMIA AND
INTEREST, TO REALLY MAKE
PROGRESS, SO IT'S JUST A
SUGGESTION MADE FOR FUTURE
CONSIDERATION.
THANK YOU.
>>VERY INTERESTING IDEA.
I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE THAT --
ONCE THEY HAVE A YEAR OR TWO OF
EXPERIENCE WITH THIS, THEN
THINKING ABOUT EITHER JUST SMALL
BUSINESSES OR INDUSTRY IN
GENERAL WOULD BE INTERESTING TO
DO.
DAVE.
>>SO I WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION
ABOUT FUNDING.
SO THE FUNDING TRENDS LOOK VERY
NICE.
BUT ONE CONCERN I HAVE ABOUT
EARLY STAGE INVESTIGATORS.
IT'S GOOD TO BRING IN EARLY
STAGE INVESTIGATORS AND SUPPORT
THEM, BUT IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THE
CASE THAT IT WAS LIKE THE FIRST
R01 RENEWAL THAT WAS THE REAL
BOTTLENECK, THINKING ABOUT
SUSTAINABILITY, HOW MANY EARLY
STAGE INVESTIGATORS CAN YOU
BRING IN WITH THE HOPE THAT MOST
OF THEM WILL BE SUCCESSFUL BY
SEEING HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE
RETIRING --
>>SO WE DID PRESENT DATA ON
RENEWALS FOR MIRAs, A COUPLE
ROUNDS AGO, AND THAT'S ON THE
FEEDBACK LOOP BLOG.
AND WE HAVE AN EMPHASIS ON THAT
FIRST RENEWAL FOR EARLY STAGE
INVESTIGATORS AND THE RENEWAL
RATES WERE QUITE HIGH, THEY WERE
IN THE 60s PERCENT, IF I
REMEMBER CORRECTLY.
SO THAT'S GOOD, RIGHT?
NOW, IT'S NEVER GOING TO BE
100%, SO YOU DO HAVE TO REALIZE
THAT SOME PEOPLE AT EVERY STAGE
ARE JUST GOING TO NOT MAKE IT
BUT OUR PHILOSOPHY IS THAT WE
WANT TO TAKE THE RISKS AND WE
WANT TO GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO
MAKE IT, AND WE DEFINITELY SEE
THAT EVEN PEOPLE -- VERY
FREQUENTLY PEOPLE WHO WE REACH
FOR TO FUND, THEY DIDN'T GET THE
OPTIMAL SCORE BUT WE SEE
SOMETHING IN THEIR APPLICATION,
WE REACH TO FUND IT, THOSE
PEOPLE SOMETIMES DO THE BEST.
AND SO I THINK THAT PHILOSOPHY
OF TAKING THE RISK AND SEEING
WHAT HAPPENS REALLY IS THE RIGHT
THING TO DO.
>>YEAH, I AGREE WITH THAT.
I THINK THAT MAKES A LOT OF
SENSE, THAT IS, REACHING MORE
FOR THE EARLY STAGE
INVESTIGATORS, GIVING THEM THE
CHANCE, BUT THEN I THINK THERE
NEEDS TO BE SOME THOUGHT ABOUT
SUSTAINABILITY AND WHAT RENEWAL
LEVEL IS ACCEPTABLE.
IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'VE DONE THAT.
>>72%.
YOU DON'T GET MUCH BETTER THAN
THAT FOR RENEWAL RATE.
BUT YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
ONE OF THE MANY REASONS WE LIKE
THE MIRA SYSTEM IS BECAUSE ONCE
WE GET A MAJORITY OF OUR FUNDING
STREAM WITH ONE GRANT PER
PERSON, IT BECOMES EASIER TO DO
THE MODELING AND THINK WHAT
SHOULD THE INFLUX AND OUTFLOW
HAVE TO BE AND YOU CAN MODULATE
THE BUDGETS AS WELL WITHIN THAT.
IF PEOPLE ARE GETTING MULTIPLE
GRANTS AND YOU DON'T KNOW HOW
MANY OR WHEN, IT A MUCH MORE
DIFFICULT SCENARIO.
SO ON TOP OF ALL THE ADVANTAGES
I THINK IT HAS FOR
INVESTIGATORS, IT HAS
ADMINISTRATIVE ADVANTAGES FOR
THE THINGS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
AS WELL.
NATALIE.
>>ARE INVESTIGATORS -- 15s --
FOR THEIR REWARD R01 PROGRAM?
>>YOU CAN'T HAVE AN RPG, AND
THOSE ARE RPGs.
>>OKAY.
>>RON.
>>I WANT TO GO BACK TO THE COST
OF DATA STORAGE.
I RECALL YEARS AGO THAT NATIONAL
LIBRARY OF MEDICINE WAS TRYING
TO SET UP DATABASES THAT WERE
FAIR AND FINDABLE, ALL THAT KIND
OF ASPECT.
HOW SUCCESSFUL IS THAT ANGLE,
WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE DATA
YOU'RE LOOKING AT FOR THE
REPURPOSABILITY?
SO AN APPLICANT WOULD BE SAYING,
I WANT TO LOOK AT THE PROTEIN
DATABASE, OH, BY THE WAY, IT IS
AVAILABLE HERE, BUT THERE'S ALSO
A SUBSIDIARY THAT IS LOOKING AT
SPECIFIC THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO
LOOK AT, AND IT IS UNDER
NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE,
INSTEAD OF TRYING TO GET, YOU
KNOW, A CO-INVESTIGATOR OR BONDS
TO PAY FOR ACCESS AND THINGS
LIKE THAT.
IS THAT POTENTIALLY LOOKED AT?
>>IT'S A REALLY DIFFICULT
QUESTION.
WE'VE DONE A NUMBER OF ANALYSES
OF THE WHOLE DATA RESOURCE
ECOSYSTEM.
I THINK IN TERMS OF FAIR, WE'VE
MADE A FAIR AMOUNT OF PROGRESS,
BUT IT DEPENDS ON WHICH OF THE
LETTERS, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH
PROGRESS.
SO FINDABLE, ACCESSIBLE,
INTRAOPERABLE, RE-USEABLE.
THE I IS REALLY THE HARDEST ONE,
THE INTRAOPERABILITY BECAUSE IT
REQUIRES STANDARDS AND IT'S
REALLY DIFFICULT TO GET PEOPLE
TO AGREE ON STANDARDS FOR MANY
THINGS.
AND IN ADDITION TO STANDARDS,
THAT REQUIRES YOU TO CONNECT TO
THINGS.
BUT THEN WE THINK ABOUT
GENERATIVE A.I. AND THOSE SORT
OF THINGS, HOW MUCH LONGER IS IT
GOING TO MATTER, RIGHT?
THERE MAY BE NO NEED TO EVEN DO
THAT BECAUSE IT CAN BE DONE FOR
YOU.
BUT I THINK THERE'S ALL KINDS OF
QUESTIONS OF, YOU KNOW, DO YOU
WANT TO REALLY JUST GO FOR
ECONOMIES OF SCALE AND HAVE
FEWER DATABASES, DATA RESOURCES,
OR DO YOU WANT TO HAVE LOTS OF
LITTLE ONES THAT ARE MUCH MORE
SPECIFIC TO THE KIND OF DATA
THAT'S GOING INTO THEM.
HUMAN CURATION OF THE DATA IS
ANOTHER BIG HOT BUTTON TOPIC.
AGAIN, I THINK GENERATIVE A.I.
IS PROBABLY GOING TO COMPLETELY
CHANGE THE LANDSCAPE THERE BUT,
YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH HUMAN CURE
RANGE OF MOTION --CURATION DO YF
THE DATA.
I CAN'T ANSWER YOUR QUESTION BUT
IT'S A GOOD ONE, RON.
>>I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND YOU.
YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING
LIKE AT A FLAT FILE DATABASE
VERSUS A RELATIONAL DA DATABASE,
RELATIONAL IS ALWAYS A LITTLE
BIT BETTER, BUT STANDARDS OF
ACCESSIBILITY HAVE TO BE UP
FRONT STATED, WE WANT TO BE, AND
IF YOU DON'T HAVE IT BUILT, THE
TOOL IS TO MAKE IT HAPPEN SO
OTHERS CAN USE IT AS WELL.
SINCE WE'RE FUNDING THIS,
WHAT -- DO SOMETHING FOR US.
>>ABSOLUTELY.
WE'VE ALSO BEEN THINKING A LOT
ABOUT REAL WORLD DATA DATABASES
LIKE ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS,
POTENTIAL VALUE, VERSUS COST
VERSUS SOCIETAL IMPLICATIONS,
PRIVACY, THINGS LIKE THAT.
>>THANKS MUCH.
>>DAVE.
>>I'LL MAYBE HAVE JUST ONE
COMMENT THAT I AGREE THAT
FEEDBACK LOOP IS AN EXCELLENT
WAY TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE
COMMUNITY, AND IN PARTICULAR,
TALKING ABOUT FINDING DATA,
FEEDBACK LOOP IS REALLY FINDABLE
ON GOOGLE, SO OFTEN I GO BACK TO
TO ANSWER SOME QUESTION OR
REMEMBER SOMETHING.
SO I JUST WANT TO ENDORSE THAT.
>>THAT'S EXACTLY PART OF THE
THINKING, IS THIS PERMANENT
RECORD THAT CAN BE FOUND FOR
GOOGLE, ET CETERA.
TERRI.
>>AND THINKING ABOUT THE ISSUES
ABOUT DATA STORAGE AND I ALWAYS
THINK OF ECONOMIES OF SCALE, AND
FOR EVERY DIFFERENT PROGRAM TO
HAVE ITS OWN LITTLE REPOSITORY
VERSUS LARGER ONES, IT MAKES ME
WONDER IF THIS IS NOT JUST
BEYOND NIGMS OR NIH, IT'S
SOMEPLACE WE'RE WORKING WITH NSF
OR DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE OR
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY FOR THESE
MIGHT BE BETTER OR A
PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP,
WHERE INDUSTRY WHO HAS A LOT OF
EXPERIENCE IN THIS AND WANT TO
DRIVE PRICES AND COLLABORATE
WITH COLLEAGUES HERE, MIGHT BE
OTHER OPPORTUNITIES.
>>I WOULD SAY YES TO ALL THOSE
THINGS.
I THINK THOSE ALL NEED TO BE
FURTHER EXPLORED AND PROBABLY NO
ONE OF THEM IS THE ANSWER.
YOU KNOW, COLLABORATING WITH
OTHER FEDERAL AGENCY, THE
PROTEIN DATA BANK IS A GREAT
EXAMPLE WHERE WE COLLABORATE
WITH SEVERAL NIH INSTITUTES AND
CENTERS BUT ALSO WITH THE NSF
AND THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY FOR
THAT ONE.
SO YOU KNOW, THERE'S AN EXAMPLE
OF THE GOVERNMENT COLLABORATION
ON THE PRIVATE/PUBLIC KIND OF
PARTNERSHIP SIDE, THERE'S AN
EXAMPLE OF THE RAB DOP CYST
GENOME DATABASE TEAR, WHICH NSF
USED TO FUND, THEN IT BECAME AN
ENTITY THAT CHARGED SUBSCRIPTION
FEES AND WENT TO INDUSTRY AND I
THINK THAT'S VERY SUCCESSFUL.
DPIPPEDING ON THE SI.DEPENDING E
SITUATION, THE USERS, IT'S GOING
TO NEED TO BE DIFFERENT MODELS
WE CONTINUE TO EMPLOY.
DANIELLE.
OH, WE HAVE 6 MINUTES.
>>JUST ONE SMALL THING.
WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE
EVALUATION OF EXCELLENCE IN
DIVERSITY, ONE MENTIONED WAS
DECREASE IN THATS RASMENT CASES.
I WOULD CAUTION THAT BECAUSE
HARASSMENT IS UNDERREPORTED AND
IT'S A NUMBER THAT'S VERY EASY
TO DECREASE INSTITUTIONALLY.
>>GOOD POINT.
OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS,
THOUGHTS?
OH, GOOD.
IN THE CHAT, LET'S SEE.
THEY'RE JUST SAYING THANK YOU.
WELL, HOW ABOUT ONLINE?
ANGELA OR ANGELA, ANY COMMENTS
OR QUESTIONS, THINGS YOU WANT TO
BRING UP?
>>NOTHING PRESSING.
IT'S AN ISSUE THAT'S BEEN RAISED
BEFORE AT PREVIOUS COUNCIL
MEETINGS BUT JUST THINKING ABOUT
AS YOU MOVE TOWARDS A ONE GRANT
PER PERSON MODEL WITH MIRA, HOW
YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT MIRA
BUDGETS, ESPECIALLY AS POSTDOC
SALARIES AND OTHER SALARY
INCREASES AND DIFFERENT COSTS
ARE HITTING INDIVIDUAL LABS.
EXP
>>YEP, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT THIS A
COUPLE ROUNDS AGO, THAT WE'RE
WORKING TO INCREASE THE MEDIAN
AND MODE MIRA BUDGET TO $300,000
DIRECT COST PER YEAR.
CURRENTLY IT'S 250, WHICH IS
BIGGER THAN R01s, IT'S ALREADY
BETTER THAN R01s SO WE WOULD
LIKE TO GET THAT ONE UP.
BUT YES, THE COST, THE
INCREASING COSTS FROM JUST
INFLATION BUT THEN ALSO WHAT MAY
WELL BE INCREASING COSTS OF
POSTDOCS, GRADUATE STUDENTS,
GIVEN CURRENT DISCUSSIONS IS
SOMETHING VERY MUCH ON OUR RAD
RADAR.
IT'S A ZERO SUM, RIGHT, SO --
WE'RE ALWAYS THINKING CAREFULLY
ABOUT WHAT'S THE BALANCE BETWEEN
FUNDING MORE LABS AND GIVING
THEM MORE MONEY.
>>ABSOLUTELY.
I APPRECIATE THE COMPLEXITY OF
IT.
>>GOOD MORNING, JON.
CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>>I CAN, ANGELA.
>>EXCELLENT.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
I'M EXCITED ESPECIALLY TO HEAR
ABOUT THE REWARD RFA.
SIMILAR TO ANGELA'S COMMENTS, NO
SPECIFIC QUESTION BUT JUST
OBSERVATION SPECIFICALLY IN WHAT
THE FOCUS AND PRIORITY OF THE
SPECIAL REVIEW COMMITTEE WILL BE
IN EVALUATING THE SUBMISSIONS.
SO I UNDERSTAND OBVIOUSLY THAT
THE RFA CAME THROUGH THE UNITE
INITIATIVE, OR AT LEAST
INFLUENCED BY IT, WHICH REALLY
FOCUSED ON ADDRESSING STRUCTURAL
RACISM WHICH, TO ME, SUGGESTS
PRIORITIZING DEIA EFFORTS THAT
AFFECT AND FACILITATE AN
INCREASED RACIAL/ETHNIC
UNDERREPRESENTED GROUPS AND THE
BIOMEDICAL SCIENCES, I CERTAINLY
UNDERSTAND INTERSECTIONALITY,
BUT TWO THINGS THAT COME UP FOR
ME JUST AS A COMMENT.
ONE IS THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING
CLEAR GUIDANCE TO THAT SPECIAL
REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR EVALUATING
WHAT WE MEAN BY DIVERSE
PERSPECTIVES BECAUSE AGAIN,
THERE ARE GREAT PEOPLE DOING
WONDERFUL TYPES OF WORK AROUND
MANY TYPES OF UNDERREPRESENTED
INDIVIDUALS BY ABILITY, SEXUAL
ORIENTATION, AND AGAIN, MY HOPE
IS THAT THE REVIEW COMMITTEE
WILL HAVE THE CHARGE TO REALLY
PRIORITIZE THOSE DEIA EFFORTS
THAT ARE ADVANCING RACIAL ETHNIC
GROUPS ACROSS THOSE IDENTITIES.
AND THE SECOND THING IS REALLY
HOW THE DEIA PROPOSED ACTIVITIES
IN THESE SUBMISSIONS WILL BE
EVALUATED.
SO WHEN I LOOK AT THE INNOVATION
SECTION FOR EXAMPLE -- SUGGESTS
THERE'S MORE THAN EVALUATION
TYPES OF RESEARCH DESIGNS BEING
CONDUCTED THAT THINGS RELATING
TO THEORETICAL CONSTRUCTS AND
TESTING, THEORETICALLY DRIVEN
INTERVENTIONS OF THOSE ACTIVITY
SUGGEST THAT SOME PROPOSALS
WOULD NEED TO HAVE INPUT FROM
SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL
SCIENTISTS.
I DON'T KNOW THAT MANY BASIC
SCIENTISTS WOULD PERHAPS HAVE AT
THE TOP OF THEIR MIND A
THEORETICALLY ORIENTED TESTING
OF A MODEL OF SOME INTERVENTION
THAT THEY'RE DOING.
SO JUST REALLY WANT TO ENCOURAGE
US, AS THESE PROPOSALS ARE
COMING FORWARD AND SUBMITTED,
THAT THE REVIEW COMMITTEE HAVE
SOME GUIDANCE ABOUT WHAT THE
EVALUATION CRITERIA WILL BE,
ESPECIALLY AROUND THE INNOVATION
SECTION FOR THE DEIA ACTIVITIES
THAT ARE SUBMITTED.
THANK YOU.
>>THANK YOU, ANGELA.
GOOD POINT.
IN TERMS OF THE SCIENCE OF THE
APPLICATIONS, THEY CAN BE WITHIN
THE SCIENCE OF ANY OF THE
INSTITUTES AND CENTERS THAT ARE
PARTICIPATING, WHICH IS 18 OR
SOMETHING LIKE THAT INSTITUTES
AND CENTERS.
THERE CAN BE CELL BIOLOGY BUT
THEY CAN BE ALL THE WAY TO
SOCIAL BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH AS
WELL.
ABSOLUTELY, I THINK IT'S GOING
TO BE VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE
REVIEWERS TO BE PROPERLY
ORIENTED AND TRAINED, AND SO IN
TERMS OF THINGS LIKE WHAT YOU
SAID IN TERMS OF WHAT INNOVATION
LOOKED LIKE FOR THE DEIA
ACTIVITIES AND WHAT ARE THE
EXPECTATIONS.
A LOT OF THAT WILL BE A LEARNING
PROCESS.
REVIEW COMMITTEES TRY IT OUT,
SEE HOW IT GOES AND THEN LEARN
AS THEY GO.
A LITTLE LIKE GENERATIVE A.I. I
GUESS IN SOME WAYS.
SO YOU KNOW, IT WILL BE AN
EXPERIENCE, HOPEFULLY WE CAN
START IT OFF RIGHT AND HOPEFULLY
IT WILL GET BETTER OVER TIME.
IN TERMS OF WHAT WE MEAN BY
DIVERSITY, WE ARE WORKING WITHIN
THE FRAMEWORK OF THE LAW AND WE
CONSTRUE IT BROADLY.
IT CAN BE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT
THINGS AS LONG AS IT'S IMPACTFUL
IN TERMS OF BUILDING DIVERSITY,
EQUITY, INCLUSION AND
ACCESSIBILITY.
AND SO THAT WILL BE
APPROPRIATELY COMMUNICATED TO
THE REVIEW PANELS AS WELL.
PAMELA.
>>THIS HAS BEEN REALLY
ENCOURAGING TO SEE A LOT OF
PROGRESS, AND I REALLY
APPRECIATE THE -- CHANGES,
ECHOING WHAT MY COLLEAGUE JUST
TALKED ABOUT, THINKING ABOUT
SOME DIVERSITY ISSUES AROUND
RACIAL AND ETHNICITY.
THE FACT THAT IT'S NOT ONE SIZE
FITS ALL.
AND HOW TO -- MOST OF US ARE
AFFECTED BY THE GEOGRAPHIC
LOCATIONS WE'RE AT AND SO THE
PARTICULAR DIVERSITY LENS WE
FIND OURSELVES IN, AND TO TRY TO
UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT MORE OF
THE NUANCES AND CULTURES OF SOME
OTHER KINDS OF POPULATIONS,
LONG-STANDING ISSUES THAT HAVE
BEEN CONFRONTED AND THAT KIND OF
THING.
SO I HAVE NOTICED AND IT'S
REALLY BEEN A PLEASURE TO SEE
VERY CAREFUL LANGUAGE IN TERMS
OF SUMMARIES WHERE PEOPLE SEEM
TO BE NOT JUST THINKING ABOUT A
UNIDIRECTIONAL ASPECT BUT
ACTUALLY PAYING ATTENTION TO
WHAT IS BEING ASKED IN A GRANT
PROPOSAL TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL
THE BASES ARE COVERED, SO I'M
SEEING A LOT OF PROGRESS.
SO THANKS FOR THAT.
BUT PROBABLY MORE WORK YET TO BE
DONE.
>>ALWAYS MORE WORK, BUT THANK
YOU VERY MUCH, PAM, FOR THAT.
ALL RIGHT.
WE'VE HIT OUR TIME MARK.
I THANK YOU FOR A GREAT, RICH
DISCUSSION.
VERY VALUABLE.
WE'RE GOING TO NOW MOVE ON, I
BELIEVE, TO MING.
MING LEI IS GOING TO GIVE YOU AN
UPDATE ON CLOUD-BASED LEARNING
PLATFORMS.
>>GOOD MORNING.
I'M HERE TO GIVE YOU A SHORT
REPORT ON THE NIGMS SAND BOX,
WHICH IS A CLOUD-BASED LEARNING
PLATFORM.
WE NAMED IT A SAND BOX TRYING TO
CAPTURE THE ESSENCE OF A
LEARNING ENVIRONMENT WHERE
STUDENTS AND STAFF CAN REALLY
LEARN BY PLAYING.
ON THEIR OWN PACE, AND -- JUST
IMAGINE THAT.
SO A LITTLE BIT OF PACK GROUND.
SO THE BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH IS
INCREASINGLY BECOMING
DATA-DRIVEN.
THAT ON ONE HAND CREATES AN
INFRASTRUCTURE NEED TO PROVIDE
ACCESS TO BIG DATA, DATA
ANALYTIC CAPACITY AND JON JUST
MENTIONED DATA STORAGE CAPACITY
FOR CUTTING-EDGE RESEARCH.
ON THE OTHER HAND, IT ALSO
PRESENTS OPPORTUNITY FOR
INVESTIGATORS TO -- ESPECIALLY
FOR THOSE IN UNDERRESOURCED
SITUATIONS TO MORE ACTIVELY
PARTICIPATE IN RESEARCH.
IF THAT ACCESS IS BROADLY
PROVIDED.
CLOUD COMPUTING DEFINITELY IS A
TOOL THAT CAN PROVIDE A BROAD
ACCESS TO THIS CAPACITY WITHOUT
EACH INSTITUTION PUTTING THE
INVESTMENT TO OPERATING AND
MAINTAINING THEIR OWN HIGH
PERFORMANCE COMPUTING CAPACITY.
SO TOGETHER, THIS REALLY FORMS
THE CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATION OF OUR
EFFORT TO TRY TO ACCELERATE TH
THE -- OF CLOUD COMPUTING.
SO STARTING FROM JANUARY 2021,
WHEN THE PROJECT STARTED, IT
REALLY HAS BEEN A BIG
COLLABORATION THAT INVOLVES
MULTIPLE MEMBERS OF NIGMS, THE
NIH OFFICE OF DATA SCIENCE
STRATEGY, AND THE STRIDES, WHICH
IS AN NIH CLOUD COMPUTING
INITIATIVE, AND THE GOOGLE CLOUD
PLATFORM AND THE AMAZON WEB
SERVICE, THE PRIVATE PARTNERS,
AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, GM-FUNDED
IDEA-INBRE AND DIVERSITY
ENHANCING TRAINING AWARDS.
SO ALL TOGETHER, IT'S WAY OVER
50 PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THE
PROJECT, SO THAT'S WHY I'M NOT
LISTING THEIR NAMES, BUT THEIR
CONTRIBUTION IS DULY RECOGNIZED.
SO WE HAVE BEEN FOCUSING ON
THREE SETS OF ACTIVITIES.
FIRST IS TO PROVIDE A TRAINING
ON CLOUD COMPUTING FUNDAMENTALS,
AND THIS WERE GENEROUSLY
PROVIDED BY GOOGLE AND AMAZON,
AND TOGETHER THEY HAVE PROVIDED
60 SIX-HOUR SESSIONS, EACH
ACCOMMODATES 15 PARTICIPANTS AND
ALL TOGETHER ABOUT 500
PARTICIPANTS HAVE BENEFITED
THROUGH THIS TRAINING.
THE SECOND SET OF ACTIVITY IS
THAT THE GOOGLE ENGINEERS HELPED
INVESTIGATORS FROM THE IDEA
NATIONAL RESOURCE FOR
QUANTITATIVE PROTEOMICS TO
MIGRATE THEIR ENTIRE DATA
OPERATION FROM ITS INSTITUTIONAL
MAINFRAME SERVER TO THE CLOUD.
SO WITHOUT GETTING INTO THE
DETAILS, THIS MIGRATION LED TO A
30-FOLD INCREASE IN THE
RESOURRESOURCE'S SERVICE CAPACI.
SO APPARENTLY PLEASED WITH THE
SERVICE, THE P.I. COMMENTED,
"THIS CLOUD ENVIRONMENT HAS BEEN
ABSOLUTELY TRANSFORMATIVE."
THE THIRD ACTIVITY IS TO BUILD
THE NIGMS SAND BOX, AS I
MENTIONED, AND I'M GOING TO USE
THE REST OF THE 10 MINUTES OF
THIS PRESENTATION TO WALK YOU
THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENTAL
PROCESS AND AT THE END SHALL
GIVE YOU A PEEK VIEW OF THE
PRODUCT.
SO TO ACCOMPLISH THE GOAL AS I
SAID EARLIER TO PROVIDE USERS
THIS LEARNING THROUGH PLAYING
ENVIRONMENT, WE CONSIDER A FEW
OBJECTIVES FOR THIS TOOL.
ONE IS, IT HAS TO PROVIDE A
COLLECTION OF LEARNING MODULES
SO THAT EACH COVER A TECHNOLOGY
OR METHODOLOGY SO THAT USERS
HAVE A RANGE OF TOPICS THEY CAN
PICK AND TO LEARN.
SECONDLY, THE MODULES HAVE TO BE
INTERACTIVE, THEREFORE, ENABLING
SELF-LEARNING, AND ALSO ACTUALLY
ENABLING USERS TO RUN THEIR OWN
DATASET THROUGH THIS MODULE.
SO GETTING A SORT OF REAL SENSE
WHAT THIS CAN DO FOR YOU.
AND AS THE DIAGRAM ON THE LEFT
ILLUSTRATES, THE MODULE HAS TO
BE ACCESSIBLE THROUGH A CLOUD
USER ACCOUNT BY A LARGE NUMBER
OF USERS, EVEN AT THE SAME TIME.
AND FINALLY, THINKING FORWARD TO
MAINTAIN A SUSTAINABLE MODEL, WE
INCLUDED SORT OF A TESTING OF
PAY MODEL IN THIS WORK.
BUT THE GOAL IS THAT WHEN
EVERYTHING IS SAID AND DONE, THE
COST FOR THE USER SHOULD BE
MINIMIZED SO THAT THEY ONLY PAY
FOR THE COMPUTATION TIME INSTEAD
INSTEADOF ALL THE UP-FRONT INVET
COSTS.
SO OBVIOUSLY THERE WAS NO
BLUEPRINT FOR A PROJECT LIKE
THIS, SO TO FIGURE IT OUT, WE
PUT TOGETHER A COUPLE PILOTS.
THIS IS HOW WE DID IT.
SO WE FIRST INVITED TWO SETS OF
TWO INVESTIGATOR TEAMS.
ONE OF THEM HAD BEEN TEACHING
PROTEOMICS, THE OTHER ONE
TEACHING GENOMICS.
SO THEY ARE EXPERT ON THAT.
AND THEY BROUGHT IN THEIR
CURRICULA AND THEN EACH ONE OF
THEM WERE PAIRED WITH A GOOGLE
ENGINEERING TEAM, AND THEY
WORKED SIDE BY SIDE TO CONVERT
THE INVESTIGATOR'S TEACHING
MATERIAL INTO CLOUD-BASED
WORKFLOWS.
THEN THEY ADDED INSTRUCTION
VIDEOS, INTERACTIVE DEMOS, AND
PRACTICUM.
AND TOGETHER, THAT LED TO THE
PRODUCTION OF TWO LEARNING
MODULES.
IN ADDITION TO THAT MODULE, THIS
PROCESS ALSO ENABLED OUR FUNDED
INVESTIGATORS TO PICK UP THE
PROGRAMMING SKILLS FROM THE
ENGINEERS, SO THAT LATER ON,
THEY CAN PRODUCE MORE MODELS
LIKE THIS.
SO WITH THE METHOD FIGURED OUT
IN YEAR ONE, SO WE SET OUT TO
BUILD MORE MODULES IN --
SPECIFICALLY 10 MODULES -- OH,
SO ENVISION TO HAVE MORE MODULES
PUT IN TOGETHER TO HAVE THE
VERSION ONE OF THE SANDBOX WE
SET OUT TO, AS I MENTIONED,
BUILD 10 MORE MODULES, BUT FROM
THE DIAGRAM YOU CAN TELL, THIS
IS ACTUAL AN OPEN CONCEPT.
AS MORE MODULES ARE BUILT THEY
CAN BE ADDED SO THE SAND BOX CAN
EXPAND, GETTING BIGGER AND
BIGGER, MORE INCLUSIVE, AND
COVER MORE TOPICS.
SO IN YEAR TWO AS WE MENTIONED,
WE FUNDED 10 MORE INVESTIGATOR
TEAMS THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPLEMENTS, AND THEY BROUGHT IN
THEIR CURRICULA ON DIFFICULT
TOPICS AND AGAIN WORK WITH THE
ENGINEERS AS I ILLUSTRATED
EARLIER, AND THEY BUILT 10 MORE
MODULES, SO TOGETHER WITH THE
TWO BUILT EARLIER THROUGH THE
PILOT, THOSE 12 MODULES NOW ARE
SITTING IN THE CLOUD AS A
DEPOSITORY, WHICH IS OUR VERSION
ONE SANDBOX AS I MENTIONED.
WITH THAT IN THE CLOUD READY TO
GO, WE TOOK AN ADVANTAGE OF THE
NIH CLOUD LAB TO DELIVER OR
DEPLOY THE SANDBOX TO USERS.
THE NIH CLOUD LAB IS A PLATFORM
BUILT BY THE NIH STRIDES TO
SECURELY DELIVER CLOUD ACCESS OR
THE USERS TO USING CLOUD
PROVIDED BY THE THREE LEADING
CLOUD SERVICE PROVIDERS.
THAT IS, GOOGLE, AMAZON, AND
MICROSOFT.
SO AMONG ITS MANY FUNCTIONS, THE
SANDBOX CAN DELIVER A FULL RANGE
OF RESOURCES, SUCH AS SANDBOX.
SO I'M GOING TO USE A DIAGRAM TO
SHOW YOU HOW -- TO ILLUSTRATE
HOW IT WORKS TO DELIVER THE
SANDBOX THROUGH THE CLOUD LAB.
SO FIRST REMEMBER WE STARTED
WITH NIGMS FUNDED AWARDS.
SO IN THIS CASE, THE FUNDED
AWARDS WILL IDENTIFY AND
AUTHENTICATE THEIR FACULTY,
STAFF AND STUDENT AS USERS.
THEN THEY SENT THE REQUEST TO
THE NIH CLOUD LAB TO GRANT THE
USERS ACCESS.
WITH THE ACCESS GRANTED TO EACH
INDIVIDUAL USER, THEY CAN USE
THE ACCOUNT TO FETCH THE MODULE
FROM THE SANDBOX OR ONE WHICH
THEY WISH TO LEARN OR PRACTICE
ON TO PLAY ON THEIR CONSOLE OR
THEIR LAPTOP.
AND IN THE END, THE COMPUTING
TIME OR CLOCK FOR BILLING AS I
MENTIONED EARLIER.
SO I'M GOING TO USE A SHORT
VIDEO TO GIVE YOU A PEEK VIEW
HOW DOES THE SANDBOX REALLY
LOOKS LIKE.
>> WELCOME TO CLOUD-ATAC, AN
OPEN-SOURCE CLOUD-BASED
INTERACTIVE PIPELINE TUTORIAL
FOR DIFFERENTIAL ATAC-SEC
FOOTPRINT ANALYSIS.
FOR BULK AND SINGLE CELL ATTACK
SEQ DATA ON JUPITER NOTEBOOKS ON
THE CLOUD.
THE PURPOSE OF THESE TUTORIALS
IS TO HELP USERS FAMILIARIZE
THEMSELVES WITH THE ANALYSIS,
STEPS IB VOFLED IN PROCESSING
ATAC-SEQ DATA, INCLUDING SPECIAL
CONSIDERATIONS FOR SINGLE AND
PAIRED SEQUENCING AS WELL AS FOR
SINGLE CELL SEQUENCING.
THESE TUTORIALS COVER SPECIFIC
STEP BY STEP WORKFLOWS STARTING
WITH DOWNLOADING RAW SEQUENCING
DATA AND DIFFERENTIAL GENOME
ANNOTATION AND ANALYSIS.
THIS MODULE INVOLVES INTERACTIVE
QUIZZES AND CUSTOMIZED
VISUALIZATIONS.
THIS MODULE IS COMPOSED OF FOUR
LESSONS USING EXAMPLES FROM
PUBLICLY AVAILABLE DATA.
TO REDUCE THE TIME REQUIREMENTS,
WE PROVIDE SPECIALLY PREPARED
SAMPLE DATA.
WE ENCOURAGE GOING THROUGH THESE
MODULES WITH THE EXAMPLE
DATASETS FIRST.
YOU CAN ALSO USE THESE NOTEBOOKS
TO PROCESS YOUR OWN DATASET.
THE FIRST LESSON WILL INTRODUCE
THE DATASET AND PROCEED THROUGH
QUALITY CONTROL, TRIMMING,
ALIGNMENT TO THE GENOME, AND
DEDUPLICATION.
THE SECOND LESSON WILL INCLUDE
VISH LIIZATION OF ATAC-SEQ
SIGNAL, PROFILING OF INSERT
SIZES AND PEAK IDENTIFICATION.
THE THIRD LESSON WILL INCLUDE
DIFFERENTIAL PEAK
IDENTIFICATION, PEAK ANNOTATION
AND FOOTPRINT ANALYSIS.
THE FOURTH LESSON FOCUSES ON
SINGLE CELL ATAC-SEQ DATA AND
INCLUDES STEPS SIMILAR TO BULK
ANALYSIS AS WELL AS SPECIAL
CONSIDERATIONS FOR SINGLE CELL.
DURING THESE LESSONS, WE WILL
USE A PUBLICLY AVAILABLE
ATAC-SEQ DATASET TO EVALUATE
AFTER COMPLETION OF THE B AF
CHROMATIN REMODELING COMPLEX.
UNDERSTANDING THE IMPACT OF TB.F
HAS BEEN KEY TO BINDING SITES
THAT PLAY A ROLE DURING
DIFFERENTIATION.
THIS IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF HOW
ATAC-SEQ CAN BE USED TO FURTHER
OUR UNDERSTANDING OF IMPORTANCE.
THE LESSONS INTRODUCE BASIC
CONCEPTS AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR
ATAC-SEQ ANALYSIS.
WE RECOMMEND STARTING WITH
TUTORIAL 1, PREPROCESSING AND
QUAL CONTROL, BUT EACH LESSON
CAN BE TAKEN INDEPENDENTLY.
THE STEPS ARE ORGANIZED INTO
BLOCKS OF CODE AND MARK DOWN
COMMENTS.
TO RUN THE CODE CLICK ON A
SECTION AND SELECT THE RUN
BUTTON AT THE TOP.
THESE LESSONS ALSO CONTAIN
QUIZZES, FLASH CARDS, AND
REPORTS THAT CAN BE INTERACTED
WITH BY CLICKING ON THEM.
AT THE END OF THE LESSONS,
YOU'LL BE ABLE TO RUN A BASIC
ATAC-SEQ ANALYSIS PIPELINE,
UNDERSTAND SPECIAL
CONSIDERATIONS FOR SINGLE END
VERSUS PAIRED END SEQUENCING AND
SINGLE CELL VERSUS BULK ATAC-SEQ
ANALYSIS.
PERFORM DIFFERENTIAL ANALYSIS TO
IDENTIFY CHANGES IN
ACCESSIBILITY, AND VISUALIZE
RESULTS IN SEVERAL WAYS,
INCLUDING HOW TO PLOT SIGNAL
ACROSS THE LOCUS OF INTEREST.
CREATE AVERAGE PROFILES AT
GENOMIC LOCI, INCLUDING
PROMOTERS.
PERFORM MOTIF AND FOOTPRINT
ANALYSIS, AND GET CLUSTERING OF
SINGLE CELLS BASED ON
ACCESSIBILITY PROFILE.
>>ALL RIGHT.
THAT'S THE END OF THE VIDEO.
AND I HOPE FROM THAT, YOU CAN
SEE WHAT USERS CAN LEARN FROM
THIS PARTICULAR MODULE, THAT'S
ONLY A VERY SMALL PART OF THE
MODULE, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, I
WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT USERS
THROUGH THIS PROCESS ALSO LEARN
HOW TO USE CLOUD RESOURCES
TOGETHER TO LEARN WHAT THEY WANT
TO LEARN.
SO WE HAVE SCHEDULED A PUBLIC
ROLLOUT ON JUNE 23RD, AND YOU'RE
ALL WELCOME TO LOG IN TO
ACTUALLY SEE A MUCH FULLER DEMO
WITH PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY KNOW
WHAT THEY'RE DOING, NOT LIKE ME,
SO WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>>WE HAVE TIME FOR A COUPLE
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
FOR MING.
>>MARK?
OR DAVE.
SORRY.
>>SO I HAVE A COUPLE OF
QUESTIONS.
SO I'M GLAD TO SEE THIS HAS MADE
A LOT OF PROGRESS OVER THE LAST
COUPLE OF YEARS.
THE FIRST QUESTION IS ABOUT
ACCESS AND IT SOUNDS LIKE FIRST
IT WILL BE PEOPLE WITH FUNDED
GRANTS.
BUT I'M CON DERING IF THERE'S
ANY THOUGHT ABOUT TRYING TO MAKE
IT MORE ACCESSIBLE AND PROVIDING
SOME GRANTS OF COMPUTER TIME TO
THOSE WHO WANT TO LEARN THESE
SKILLS BUT MAYBE DON'T HAVE
ACCESS TO AN NIH GRANT AWARD.
>>YEAH -- IS THIS ON?
SO WE DEFINITELY THOUGHT ABOUT
THAT.
SO WE STARTED WITH SORT OF A
CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT, SO
DEVELOPMENT FIRST PHASE OF
USING.
THE SECOND PHASE REALLY CAN BE
ESSENTIAL TO ANY OTHER
INSTITUTION TO USE IT.
THE REASON I'M SAYING THAT IS AT
THIS POINT, THE -- SERVICE
PROVIDERS ACTUALLY ONLY PROVIDE
ACCESS TO INSTITUTION ALIZED
USERS FOR SECURITY REASONS.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE JUST PLAYING A
COMPUTER GAME.
SO AS LONG AS ORGANIZATIONS OR
INSTITUTIONS PROVIDE THIS KIND
OF AUTHORIZATION, THEY CAN LOG
ON AND USE IT, THEN THE NEXT
PHASE IS THAT'S WHY WE'RE
BUILDING THIS PAY MODEL TO TEST
IT.
THEN CLOUD LAB CAN ACTUALLY
CLOCK THE COMPUTATION TIME.
THEY DON'T NEED TO PAY ANYTHING
ELSE BUT THE COMPUTATION TIME IS
WHAT THEY NEED TO PAY.
AND ONLY THROUGH THAT WAY, THE
PROVIDER, THE SERVICE PROVIDER
CAN SUSTAIN THIS KIND OF
SERVICE.
I THINK -- DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR
QUESTION?
>>SO I GUESS I'M WONDERING, IS
THERE ANY WAY TO PAY SOME OF THE
COMPUTING TIME FOR STUDENTS AT
UNDERRESOURCED UNIVERSITIES WHO
WANT TO LEARN THE SKILLS, BUT
THEY'RE -- FACING A BILL MIGHT
BE SOME BARRIER TO USING IT.
>>SO OBVIOUSLY THAT WAS THE
FIRST THING IN OUR MIND WHEN WE
STARTED THIS PROJECT, SO THERE
ARE A NUMBER OF MEASURES FOR
THAT.
FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO DELIVER
THE GOOD NEWS.
WE TESTED THE COST FOR USING
THIS MODULE AT THIS TIME, RIGHT?
SO A TYPICAL MODULE LIKE THIS
WITH A SKILLED USER LIKE THE
PEOPLE WHO HAVE DEVELOPED IT
RUNNING IT THROUGH, THE
COMPUTATION TIME COST ABOUT $1.
SO WE FACTOR IN FOR REAL USER
HAVE TO FUMBLE THROUGH AND
ESPECIALLY YOU CAN -- ESPECIALLY
WHEN THEY USE THEIR OWN DATA,
UPLOAD THEIR OWN DATA, IT CAN
BE, LET'S SAY, 10 TIMES MORE, 30
TIMES MORE.
SO WE STILL FEEL LIKE THAT IS
MANAGEABLE, 20, $30.
BUT STILL, THIS PHASE, THE FIRST
DEPLOYMENT, WE ACTUALLY MADE --
WE HAVE MADE ARRANGEMENT THAT
NIGMS AND OUR GENEROUS PARTNER
ODSS WILL PAY FOR THAT.
WE JUST CLOCK THE TIME, BUT WE
WILL PAY THE BILL TO GOOGLE.
THE THIRD THING I WOULD SAY IS
GOING FORWARD, ESPECIALLY FOR
WHAT YOU MENTION UNDERRESOURCED
INSTITUTION, AND THE
DEVELOPING -- THE INVESTIGATORS
WE PICK, THEY'RE ALL FROM SUCH
INSTITUTIONS.
SO THE GRANT THAT WE FUNDED THEM
ACTUALLY -- PART OF THE MISSION
OF THIS GRANT IS TO SUPPORT THE
DEVELOPMENT OF INVESTIGATORS.
SO THEY WILL BE ABLE TO USE
THEIR GRANT MONEY TO PAY AT
LEAST SOME OF THE COST.
AND FINALLY, I WOULD SAY, FOR
THE REAL LONG TERM, THE HOPE IS
THE PROCESS OF DEMOCRATIZED
CLOUD COMPUTING WILL ENCOURAGE
INSTITUTIONS TO SHIFT THEIR
VERY, VERY HEAVY, HEFTY
INVESTMENT IN BUILDING HIGH
PERFORMING COMPUTATION TO
ACTUALLY SERVERS, INSTEAD OF
BUYING NEW TOYS, UPGRADING,
ACTUALLY BUYING NEW SOFTWARE,
ACTUALLY THE COST -- MANY
INSTITUTIONS SPEND HUNDRED
MILLIONS JUST WITHOUT KNOWING.
A SMALL PART OF THAT WILL ENABLE
TO SUSTAIN THIS KIND OF TRAINING
OR LEARNING PLATFORM.
>>LET ME ASK ANOTHER QUICK
QUESTION.
SO NOW THAT YOU'VE GOT THE FIRST
MODULES DEPLOYED, IN A FEW
YEARS, IT WILL BE TIME TO UPDATE
THEM BECAUSE THE METHODS WILL
CHANGE, AND SO WE START THINKING
ABOUT HOW TO UPDATE THEM AND IF
YOU HAVEN'T, MAYBE NOW IS THE
TIME TO START THINKING ABOUT
MECHANISMS FOR GETTING THEM
UPDATED IN THE FUTURE.
>>I HAVEN'T HAD ANY TIME TO
THINK ABOUT ANYTHING, JUST TO
GET IT OUT, BUT WE ENVISION THIS
ACTUALLY -- IT DOESN'T HAVE TO
WAIT FOR A FEW YEARS.
THE SYSTEM IS SET UP -- IT'S
REALLY A CONTINUOUS PROCESS.
BECAUSE ANY NEW MODULE CAN BE
BUILT AT ANY TIME AS LONG AS
SORT OF MEET THIS KIND OF
QUALITY CONTROL.
IT CAN BE ADDED IN.
THAT INCLUDES NEW TOPICS, NEW
METHODOLOGY, AND ALSO AS YOU
MENTIONED, UPDATING THE CURRENT
TOPICS AND MODULES.
>>SORRY, WHO DOES THE QUALITY
CONTROL CHECK?
>>AT THIS POINT, WE HAVE THE
STRIDES TEAM, AND SO THIS IS A
GREAT POINT.
SO AGAIN, STARTING THIS PROCESS,
WE'VE FACTORED THIS IN, SO WE
REALLY BROUGHT IN INVESTIGATORS
WHO HAVE BEEN TEACHING THIS
CERTAIN TOPIC.
FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS.
ONE IS, THEY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE
DOING.
SECONDLY, WHAT HE ARE DOING
ACTUALLY ARE THE PROVEN OR
VALIDATED METHOD.
IT'S NOT IT'S GOOD FOR -- THAT
IS ONE LEVEL OF QUALITY CONTROL
FROM THE SCIENTIFIC STANDPOINT.
THE TECHNICAL STANDPOINT, WE
HAVE THE STRIDES TEAM AT NIH
TOGETHER WITH THE GOOGLE
ENGINEERS TO MAKE SURE IT CAN BE
INTEGRATED AND DEPLOYED
SMOOTHLY.
>>THANK YOU.
>>ANY LAST MINUTE QUESTION
BEFORE I TAKE A BREAK?
GREAT.
WELL, THANK YOU, MING.
IT'S GREAT TO SEE THIS COMING
ONLINE.
VERY EXCITING, AND HOPEFULLY
THIS IS GOING TO CATALYZE A LOT
MORE THINKING AND USE OF THE
TOOLS THAT ARE AVAILABLE.
>>THANK YOU.
>>WE'RE GOING TO TAKE -- LET'S
TAKE -- WE CAN TAKE A 10-MINUTE
BREAK, THAT WOULD BE GOOD, COME
BACK AT 11:20.
>>NOW WE ARE GOING TO HEAR A
PRESENTATION FROM PAMELA STACKS
AND LINDA HUANG, WHO WERE THE
CO-CHAIRS OF THE COUNCIL WORKING
GROUP THAT YOU APPROVED LAST
TIME THAT HAS BEEN EVALUATING
THE NIGMS BRIDGES TO
BACCALAUREATE PROGRAM.
JUST FOR CONTEXT, PART OF ARE
OUR STRATEGIC PLAN IS TO
EVALUATE ALL OF OUR PROGRAMS ON
A ROLLING BASIS, SO THIS IS ONE
SUCH EVALUATION AND THIS IS HOW
WE DO IT.
SO PAMELA AND LINDA, TAKE IT
AWAY.
>>GOOD MORNING.
I'M PAMELA, AND GLAD TO BE HERE
THIS MORNING, AND BE ON THE
INSIDE OF DOING ONE OF THESE
EVALUATIONS.
WE HAD A GREAT WORKING GROUP WHO
HAD A LOT OF EXPERIENCE WORKING
WITH THE BRIDGES TO THE
BACCALAUREATE PROGRAM, WHICH HAS
BEEN AROUND SINCE 1992.
SO IT'S ONE OF THE OLDIES.
AND MY CO-CHAIR, LINDA, IS FROM
UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS
BOSTON.
DR. SUZANNE BARBER IS THE DEAN
OF GRADUATE STUDIES AT --
UNIVERSITY BUT ACTUALLY RAN A
PROGRAM AT VIRGINIA
COMMONWEALTH, AND THEN DAVID
JULIAN IS AT UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA, RUNS BOTH A -- PROGRAM
AND A BRIDGES TO BACCALAUREATE
PROGRAM, SO A LITTLE BIT OF PWD
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY
THERE.
THEN OUR COLLEAGUE GEZA VARHE
VARHEGYI FROM OHIO.
THAT'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT
BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING AT
TWO-YEAR TO FOUR-YEAR PROGRAMS,
AND GEZA RUNS A PROGRAM OUT OF
OHIO.
SO IN TERMS OF OUR EVALUATION,
WANTED TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT
OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE BRIDGES
PROGRAM.
ON THE SLIDES WE'LL JUST BE
CALLING IT B2B BUT AT MY
DISCUSSION, I'LL CALL IT
BRIDGES.
NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH THE
BRIDGES TO THE DOCTORATE.
SO THERE ARE A COUPLE DIFFERENT
BRIDGE PROGRAMS, BUT WE'LL BE
TALKING ONLY ABOUT THE BRIDGES
TO THE BACCALAUREATE, WHICH IS A
TWO-YEAR TO A FOUR-YEAR FOCUS
FOR THE STUDENTS.
ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE LOOKING
AT IS WHETHER IT'S MEETING ITS
STATED OBJECTIVES SO WE'LL HAVE
TO TELL YOU WHAT THESE ARE, IS
IT THE RIGHT OBJECTIVES, AND
WHAT CAN WE LEARN.
THIS IS AN INTERESTING CHALLENGE
THAT WE ALL HAD, IS THAT THE
FUNDING MECHANISM FOR THIS
PROGRAM HAS CHANGED IN 2019.
R25 REFERRED TO AS A RESEARCH
EDUCATION PROGRAM, AND TO A T34,
WHICH IS A TRAINING PROGRAM, AND
SPOILER ALERT, ONE OF THE REALLY
GOOD NEWS ABOUT THAT IS GETTING
UNIFORMITY IN HOW THE STUDENTS
ARE FUNDED SO IT PUTS EVERYTHING
ON EQUAL FOOTING FOR THE
STUDENTS IN THE BRIDGES PROGRAM.
BUT WE WANTED TO SEE WHAT WE
COULD LEARN FROM THE PREVIOUS
PROGRAM BECAUSE THAT WAS FROM UP
UNTIL 2019, AND WE HOPE SOON
THEREAFTER WE WILL BE ABLE TO
LOOK AT THE T34 AND SEE WHAT WE
CAN LEARN FROM THE R25 PROGRAM
AND HOW IT CAN BE APPLIED TO THE
T34 TRAINING PROGRAM.
AND THEN FINALLY FOLLOW UP WITH
THE WORKING GROUP
RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO WE WANTED TO GIVE YOU SCOPE
IN TERMS OF THE GEOGRAPHY AND
THE IDEA THAT WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT TWO-YEAR TO FOUR-YEAR
STUDENTS MAKING THAT TRANSITION,
AND IN SOME WAYS, IT'S ALREADY A
MISNOMER, TALKING ABOUT TWO-YEAR
AND FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTIONS,
BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE
STUDENTS, THEY OFTEN SPEND MUCH
LONGER TIMES AT EACH OF THOSE
KINDS OF INSTITUTIONS.
BUT YOU CAN SEE IT'S
GEOGRAPHICALLY SPREAD THROUGHOUT
THE U.S.
IT WAS CREATED IN 1992, AND IN
THAT -- AT THAT TIME, IT WAS
CALLED BRIDGES TO THE FUTURE,
AND THE TWO BRIDGE PROGRAMS, THE
BACCALAUREATE AND THE DOCTORATE,
WERE TOGETHER.
THE OVERARCHING GOAL IS TO
SUPPORT EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES
THAT ENHANCE THE DIVERSITY OF
THE BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH
WORKFORCE, AND SO IT'S WRIT
LARGE IN TERMS OF THE
EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES, IT CAN
BE CURRICULAR CHANGES, RESEARCH
ACTIVITIES IN A CLASSROOM
SETTING, OR ACTUALLY DOING
RESEARCH WITH FACULTY.
IN TERMS OF THE SHORT TERM GOAL,
VERY SPECIFIC IN TERMS OF ONE OF
OUR COLLEAGUES IS INVOLVED WITH
ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT ISSUES,
THINKING ABOUT THE STUDENTS THAT
ARE LEAVING THE TWO-YEAR
INSTITUTION AND GOING TO THE
FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTION, AND THAT
THEY'LL BE INVOLVED WITH
STUDYING BIOMEDICAL SCIENCES.
THAT'S AN IMPORTANT ATTRIBUTE
THERE.
OUR INTERMEDIATE GOAL, AND THAT
WAS ACTUALLY ADDED IN 2007, IS
TO ENHANCE THE POOL OF STUDENTS
WHO ACTUALLY COMPLETE THEIR
BACHELOR'S DEGREE IN A STEM
FIELD.
MY REGRET IS THAT THIS STAGE, WE
HAVE MORE TO TELL BUT TH ABOUT E
BACCALAUREATES AWARDED BUT
THAT'S ONE OF THE
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FUTURE.
IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT THE
BRIDGES PROGRAM IS FITTING IN
WITH THE OVERARCHING GOALS
WITHIN NIH, AND WE HAVE
HIGHLIGHTED HERE THE ENTIRE POOL
THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE
FUTURE GENERATION OF RESEARCHER,
SO WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT THE
ENTIRE POOL OF FOLKS THAT ARE
GOING INTO HIGHER EDUCATION TO
ENSURE THAT WE REALLY BRING THAT
FOCUS FROM VERY DIFFERENT
INDIVIDUALS.
AND THEN THE LAST POINT HERE IS
THAT THE FACT THAT IT'S LOOKING
AT THE DIVERSITY OF THE
BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH WORKFORCE,
BUT WE'RE LOOKING ALSO AT
MULTIPLE TRAINING AND CAREER
STAGES.
SOMETIMES WE FOCUS ON THE PH.D.
OR THE MD PH.D., AND THIS THEN
LOOKS AT THE ENTIRE ARRAY OF
HIGHER ED.
THIS WAS -- WE ALTERED IT A
LITTLE BIT, THIS CAME FROM TWD,
THE TRAINING, WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT AND DIVERSITY
PROGRAMS, AND YOU CAN SEE --
SORRY, WAS I PUSHING THIS -- SO
YOU CAN SEE ACROSS THE --
PERHAPS THIS IS A BIT TOO
RESPONSIVE.
ON THE LONGER LINE HERE, WE SEE
ALL THE WAY FROM K TELL TO K12 ,
SO YOU'RE PROBABLY AWARE OF THE
TWD PROGRAMS.
WE HAVE THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE
MEANT TO BE THE TWO-YEAR
INSTITUTIONS FEEDING INTO THE
FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTIONS, WHICH IS
NOW SHORTHAND AS THE
UNDERGRADUATE, AND WE HAVE THE
BRIDGES TO THE BACCALAUREATE.
SOMETIMES WHEN THE STUDENTS ARE
TRANSFERRING IN TO THE FOUR-YEAR
INSTITUTION, THERE MAY BE A
U-RISE OR A MARC PROGRAM OR A
BUILD PROGRAM AND IF WE CAN HELP
STUDENTS BE AWARE OF THOSE
OPPORTUNITIES BEFORE THEY
TRANSFER, THAT'S A GOOD LANDING
SPOT FOR THEM.
SO I'VE SORT OF IMPLIED BUT I
WANTED TO BE VERY SPECIFIC HERE
ABOUT THE POPULATION AND TALKING
ABOUT THE POOL.
I KNEW THERE WERE A LOT OF
STUDENTS BUT IT TURNS OUT THAT
THERE'S ALMOST 9 MILLION
STUDENTS IN 2020 THAT REPRESENT
41% OF THE UNDERGRADUATES THAT
ARE IN COMMUNITY COLLEGE OR
TWO-YEAR INSTITUTIONS.
SO THAT'S A HECK OF A LOT OF
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INVESTING IN
THEIR HIGHER EDUCATION AND THEIR
STUDENT -- EXCUSE ME -- THEIR
FAMILY'S TRAJECTORIES.
THERE'S A LOT OF DATA HERE AND
IT TURNS OUT THAT ON AVERAGE,
THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS
TEND TO BE A LITTLE BIT OLDER OF
LOWER SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS, SO
THE FINANCIAL ISSUES ARE
ACTUALLY QUITE COMPELLING, AND
SOMETIMES CAN BE FROM -- ARE
MORE LIKELY TO BE FROM
UNDERREPRESENTED RACIAL AND
ETHNIC GROUPS THAN THE FOUR-YEAR
COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY STUDENTS.
THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST
CRITICAL POINT AND THIS DEALS
WITH FULL TIME VERSUS PART-TIME
ATTENDANCE.
AND MANY OF THE COMMUNITY
COLLEGE STUDENTS ARE WORKING
FULL TIME.
SO THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY
IT LEADS TO SUCH LONG TIMES
RESIDING IN A COMMUNITY COLLEGE
BEFORE THEY TRANSFER.
BUT EVEN AFTER TRANSERRI TRANSFO
THE FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTION,
STUDENTS CONTINUE TO EXPERIENCE
FINANCIAL HARD SLIPS.
IF YOU GO INTO A STEM FIELD,
THERE'S LABORATORY CHALLENGES
AND SO ON, SO THIS CHALLENGE OF
TIME AND FINANCIAL NEED WEIGHS
HEAVILY ON OUR TRANSFER
STUDENTS.
SO THE QUESTIONS THAT BUILT INTO
WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE MEETING THE
GOALS IS, WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE
BRIDGES STUDENTS TRANSFER TO A
FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTION?
IT TURNS OUT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO
BE A PARTNER INSTITUTION, SO
THESE ARE PARTNERS THAT ARE
FUNDED.
AND THE STUDENTS, OF COURSE, ARE
FREE AGENTS, SO THOUGH THE
RELATIONSHIP IS ESTABLISHED AND
HOPEFULLY SOME OF THE MENTORING
IS HAPPENING AT BOTH
INSTITUTIONS, STUDENTS ACTUALLY
CAN GO TO ANOTHER FOUR-YEAR
INSTITUTION AND THOSE ARE
FOLLOWED AS WELL.
AND THEN FOR THOSE WHO ACTUALLY
TRANSFER TO A FOUR-YEAR
INSTITUTION, WHAT PERCENTAGE
COMPLETE THE
BACCALAUREATE DEGREE?
WE'RE INTERESTED IN, IN THE
FUTURE, ACTUALLY COMPLETING THE
BACCALAUREATE DEGREE IN STEM
FIELDS, BUT AT THIS POINT, WE'RE
ONLY FOCUSED ON THE
BACCALAUREATE AT THE GREE.
DEGREE.THE TAKE-HOME, AND WE HO
CONVINCE YOU OF THIS, IS THAT
THE BRIDGES PROGRAM IS BEING
VERY SUCCESSFUL FOR THESE
STUDENTS.
A SMALL AMOUNT OF DATA TO SET
YOU UP PERHAPS TO THE COMPLEXITY
OF THIS ANALYSIS, AND WE WERE
STRONGLY SUPPORTED BY -- AT THE
NIH WORKING THROUGH A LOT OF
THIS DATA.
SO THOUGH THIS PROGRAM STARTED
IN 1992, WE'RE FOCUSING ON THE
YEARS 2005 TO 2019, SO THAT'S
ABOUT 15 YEARS WORTH, AND DURING
THAT TIME PERIOD, 88 PROGRAMS
WERE FUNDED.
SO THAT'S NOT -- SOME
INSTITUTIONS ARE FUNDED MELT PEE
TIMES SO THESE ARE ACTUALLY
88 INDIVIDUAL INSTITUTIONS OR
GROUPS OF INSTITUTIONS'
PARTNERSHIPS.
IN TERMS OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF
INSTITUTIONS INVOLVED, NOTE THAT
FOR THE TWO-YEAR, WE HAD 167, SO
WE OFTEN HAVE MORE THAN ONE
COMMUNITY COLLEGE INTERACTING
WITH A FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTION.
OR VICE VERSA, IT TURNS OUT.
IN THE FOUR-YEAR, WE HAVE
92 PROGRAMS INVOLVED.
FOR THE PROGRAM STRUCTURE, IN
SOME WAYS THIS IS A LITTLE BIT
OF A TEASE FOR YOU.
WE CALL IT A SUMMER-ONLY OR A
SUMMER-PLUS PROGRAM.
AND THERE WERE HUGE DIVERSITY IN
THE KINDS OF ACTIVITIES THAT
WERE INVOLVED IN THESE PROGRAMS
UNDER THE R25 FOCUS.
AND IN THIS CASE, THERE WERE
SOME PROGRAMS THAT ONLY DID A
SUMMER -- A SUMMER-ONLY RESEARCH
PROJECT, AND THAT WAS 21 OF
THESE INSTITUTIONS, AND THEN THE
OTHERS WERE CALLED SUMMER-PLUS
BECAUSE NOT ONLY DID THEY HAVE
THE SUMMER ACTIVITY, THEY ALSO
HAVE SOME RESEARCH ACTIVITY OR
PAYMENTS FOR THE STUDENTS DURING
THE ACADEMIC YEAR.
TO GIVE YOU A SIZE OF THE NUMBER
OF STUDENTS WHO WERE IMPACTED,
THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANT
SPACES UNDER THIS TIME PERIOD
WAS 9800.
THE MEDIAN WAS 15 SPACES PER
YEAR, BUT YOU CAN SEE THE RANGE
IS ACTUALLY QUITE LARGE, FROM
3 TO 48 SPACES PER YEAR.
NOT ALL OF THESE SPACES WERE
FUNDED, AND SO THE TOTAL NUMBER
OF STUDENTS SUPPORTED ARE ABOUT
8500.
MEANING THAT IN GENERAL, IN
TERMS OF THE NUMBER OF SPACES
PER STUDENTS, YOU HAVE 1.2 YEARS
OF SUPPORT PROVIDED FOR THE
NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO ARE
THERE.
IT DOES TURN OUT THAT FOR SIX OF
THE PROGRAMS, WE DON'T KNOW THE
NUMBER OF STUDENTS.
SO THIS IS, AGAIN, TO GIVE YOU A
FEELING, THIS IS ALL
SELF-REPORTED DATA, SO YOU CAN
FACTOR THAT IN AS WELL.
SO THIS IS OUR BASELINE.
I'M SETTING YOU UP WITH THIS
INFORMATION BECAUSE OF A REALLY
CRAZY SLIDE THAT'S GOING TO SHOW
UP.
IT'S NOT ONE THAT WE'RE USED TO
SEEING, BUT IF YOU BEAR WITH ME,
DON'T MAKE IT A TRADITIONAL
SLIDE.
IS MY WARNING.
SO THE SCOPE OF THE -- I TOLD
YOU, RIGHT?
THE SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION.
SO WE HAVE SOME YEARS HERE, SO I
SAID THAT IT STARTED IN 1992.
TURNS OUT EACH ONE OF THESE
COLUMNS IS A PARTICULAR PROGRAM.
SO THIS PROGRAM HAS BEEN FUNDED
CONTINUOUSLY THROUGH COMPETITIVE
RENEWALS SINCE 1992 UP TO 2019,
AND TO START OUT, IN THAT FIRST
FUNDING YEAR, FIVE OF THE
INSTITUTIONS WERE FUNDED -- OR
PARTNERSHIPS WERE FUNDED, AND IF
YOU GO ALL THE WAY UP TO THE
TOP, YOU SEE ONLY THREE,
HOWEVER, CONTINUED THEIR FUNDING
OVER THAT LENGTH OF TIME.
SO THEN AS WE WALK THROUGH HERE,
YOU CAN SEE AS WE GET DOWN TO
2019, YOU GET ONE INSTITUTION
THAT WAS FUNDED THAT YEAR, AND
THAT WAS EXACTLY AT THE
TRANSITION GOING FROM THE R25 TO
THE T34 TRAINING MECHANISM.
A COUPLE OF OTHER ELEMENTS HERE.
AS YOU GO ALL THE WAY UP, YOU
CAN SEE THAT THERE ARE ACTUALLY
A FAIR NUMBER OF INSTITUTIONS
THAT ARE FUNDED IN 2019.
FORGIVE ME IF MY NUMBERS ARE
WRONG, BUT SOMETHING LIKE
33 ALONG THAT TOP ROW ARE THE
CURRENT -- WERE THE CURRENTLY
FUNDED PARTNERSHIPS IN 2019.
AS IS OFTEN THE CASE, WE DO GET
COST EXTENSIONS, SO THE YELLOW
BLOCKS ARE TO INDICATE THAT.
BUT IMPORTANTLY, IN TERMS OF,
AGAIN, THE DATA ANALYSIS PART OF
US, THE Xs ARE WHERE NO
STUDENT LEVEL DATA WAS PROVIDED,
AND WE'RE ALWAYS VERY SAD ABOUT
THAT BECAUSE WE DON'T, THEN --
WE CAN'T TRACK BEST PRACTICES OR
WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE
STUDENTS THERE.
SO THIS IS TO GIVE YOU A SENSE
THAT THERE'S HUGE VARIETY IN THE
LENGTH OF TIME THAT PROGRAMS
HAVE EXISTED IN THIS FUNDING
MECHANISM.
AND THAT THERE'S A HUGE ARRAY OF
SIZE AND A HUGE ARRAY OF
DIFFERENT KINDS OF PRACTICES.
AND WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER
TO MY COLLEAGUE.
>>THANK YOU, PAM, FOR THAT
SETUP.
SO I'M GOING TO TELL YOU NOW
ABOUT THE WORKING GROUP, THE
DATA THAT WE LOOKED AT, WHAT OUR
FINDINGS WERE, AND WHAT OUR
RECOMMENDATIONS WERE.
SO -- I WENT BACKWARDS.
AM I GOING BACKWARDS?
SORRY.
THERE WE GO.
ALL RIGHT.
SO TO COME BACK TO THE SLIDE
THAT YOU'VE ALREADY SEEN, THE
FIRST THING THAT WE WERE ASKED
TO DO WAS TO LOOK TO SEE WHETHER
OR NOT THE BRIDGES TO
BACCALAUREATE PROGRAM, THE B2B
PROGRAM, WAS ACTUALLY MEETING
THE PROGRAM GOALS.
SPECIFICALLY, WE LOOKED AT THE
EXPLICIT GOALS THAT WERE STATED
ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE B2B
STUDENTS WERE ACTUALLY
TRANSFERRING TO FOUR-YEAR
INSTITUTIONS AND WHETHER OR NOT
ONCE THEY TRANSFERRED TO A
FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTION, WHETHER
OR NOT THEY ACTUALLY COMPLETED
THEIR BACHELOR'S DEGREE.
AND SO NO MATTER HOW YOU SLICE
AND DICE THE DATA, WE LOOKED AT
IT IN MANY FORMS.
WE LOOKED AT IT FROM A
PROGRAM-SPECIFIC LEVEL, WE
LOOKED AT IT FROM A STUDENT
LEVEL DATA KIND OF THING.
THE WORKING PANEL FOUND THAT
THERE WAS NO QUESTION THAT THE
B2B PROGRAM WAS SUCCESSFUL, THAT
IT WAS ACTUALLY MEETING ITS
GOAL.
SO I'LL SHOW YOU A LITTLE BIT OF
DATA, NOT ALL OF THE DATA THAT
WE LOOKED AT.
SO HERE THIS IS STUDENT-LEVEL
DATA.
SO THESE ARE NOT -- YOU KNOW,
ALL THE STUDENTS ARE POOLED
TOGETHER, AND THEN THEY'RE
GRAPHED DEPENDING ON HOW MANY
YEARS OF FOLLOW-UP THAT THERE
WAS FOR THAT STUDENT.
IN BLUE, WE HAVE THE B2B
STUDENTS THAT WERE IN THE
PROGRAM, AND WHAT YOU CAN SEE IS
THAT IF YOU FIT A CURVE TO THAT
DATA, YOU CAN SEE THAT IT'S
EVENTUALLY REACHED AT ABOUT 80%
OF TRANSFER.
WHICH IS SUPER GOOD, ESPECIALLY
COMPARED TO THE NATIONAL STUDENT
CLEARINGHOUSE RATES, WHICH IS
COMPLICATED AND I CAN GET INTO
THAT IF YOU ARE REALLY
INTERESTED, BUT IF THEY GO AHEAD
AND TAKE THAT DATA AND THEN FIT
THE CURVE ON TO THAT, THAT DATA
IS ONLY PROVIDED UP TO SIX YEARS
BUT YOU GET AN -- THERE'S A BIG
DIFFERENCE HERE AND A BIG IMPACT
ON THESE STUDENTS FOR GETTING
THEM TO TRANSFER TO A COMMUNITY
COLLEGE -- TO A FOUR-YEAR.
THEN YOU LOOK AT THE STUDENTS,
ONCE THEY TRANSFER, WHAT HAPPENS
TO THEM THERE.
THE BRIDGES TO BACCALAUREATE
STUDENTS ARE HERE IN BLUE.
THIS IS STUDENT-11 DATA AND WE
DID LOOK OT IT AT IT IN MANY DIT
WAYS.
YOU GET A COMPLETION RATE OF
GREATER THAN 80%, I THINK THAT'S
LIKE 89% AND THAT, AGAIN, IS FAR
GREATER THAN THE NSC DATA HERE
WHICH, WHEN YOU FIT TO A CURVE,
GIVES YOU AN ASYMPTOTIC RATE OF
ABOUT 70%.
SO IT WAS SUPER IMPORTANT,
IMPACTFUL, AND BASICALLY
PROVIDING SUPPORT FOR VERY
IMPORTANT AND CRITICAL GROUP OF
TALENT THAT ISN'T ALWAYS GREATLY
SUPPORTED.
SO IN SUMMARY, FOR LOOKING AT
TRANSFER AND LOOKING AT
COMPLETION, LIKE I SAID, WE FELT
LIKE THIS PROGRAM MET THE GOALS,
THE ASYMPTOTIC TRANSFER RATES
WERE VERY GOOD, THEY CALLED FOR
THE FOA IN 2007 WHICH WAS 70%,
THE BACHELOR COMPLETIONS WHICH
ARE BETWEEN EIGHT' TO 90% WHICH
ARE ALSO GOOD WHICH EXCEEDS THE
NATIONAL BENCHMARK HERE OF 50%
FROM THE NCES.
SO I THINK WE DON'T WANT TO LOSE
SIGHT OF THE IDEA THAT THIS IS A
VERY GOOD PROGRAM, IT'S A VERY
IMPACTFUL PROGRAM AND IT'S SUPER
IMPORTANT.
THERE WAS NOBODY ON THE WORKING
GROUP WHO THOUGHT THIS WAS EVEN
A CONTROVERSIAL QUESTION.
SO THEN WE DECIDED TO TAKE AND
LOOK AND SEE, ARE THE GOALS THE
CORRECT GOALS BECAUSE WE'RE
BEING ASKED TO LACK AT THIS.
SO CURRENTLY TH EXPLICIT GOALS E
TRANSFER TO FOUR-YEAR
INSTITUTION WHICH WE LOOKED AT
AND COMPLETION OF BACHELOR'S
GREE.
WE ONLY HAD THE DATA WE HAD TO
WORK ON.
WHAT THE WORKING GROUP FELT
LIKE, WHICH I THINK PAM HAS
ALREADY TOUCHED ON A LITTLE BIT,
IS THAT THE NIH'S EXPLICIT OR
KIND OF IMPLICIT GOAL HERE IS TO
TRY TO ENHANCE THE DIVERSITY IN
THE BIOMEDICAL WORKFORCE.
SO WE KEPT ASKING QUESTIONS LIKE
WHAT DID THEY GRADUATE WITH
A DEGREE IN?
WHAT ARE THEY DOING AFTERWARDS?
AND WE DON'T HAVE THAT DATA TO
REALLY BE ABLE TO FOLLOW THIS
UP.
WE CONSIDER EXPLICIT GOALS THAT
COULD INCLUDE METRICS THAT WOULD
ALLOW US BE BETTER TO EVALUATE
THE OUTCOMES HERE BY LOOKING AT
DIVERSITY IN BIOMEDICAL
WORKFORCE.
SO WE WANTED TO KNOW SIMPLE
THINGS LIKE IS IT A STEM-RELATED
BACHELOR'S DEGREE OR DID THEY GO
OFF AND DO ART HISTORY, WHICH IS
GREAT AND IMPORTANT BUT MAY NOT
BE PART OF THE GOALS HERE BUT WE
DON'T HAVE THAT DATA TO REALLY
BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
WE WERE ALSO CURIOUS ABOUT DATA
ON ACTIVITIES AFTER COMPLETION
OF THE PROGRAM THERE ARE OTHER
TWD PROGRAMS OUT THERE WHERE THE
GOAL FOR THOSE PROGRAMS IS TO
GET STUDENTS TO GO INTO
GRADUATE DEGREES.
WE FELT LIKE IT WOULD BE GREAT
IF THESE COMMUNITY COLLEGE
STUDENTS WENT ON TO GRADUATE
DEGREES BUT HONESTLY YOU'RE
FINDING THEM QUITE YOUNG IN THE
ENTIRE PROCESS, AND THE WORKING
GROUP FELT STRONGLY THAT IF
THESE STUDENTS ENTERED THE
BIOMEDICAL WORKFORCE, THAT THAT
SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A WIN AS
WELL, AND IT WOULD BE NICE TO
HAVE THAT DATA WHICH WE DON'T
HAVE RIGHT NOW.
WE ALSO UNDERSTAND IT CAN BE
ONEROUS TO HAVE SOMEBODY AT A
COMMUNITY COLLEGE TRYING TO
FOLLOW UP ON ALL THESE PEOPLE
WHERE THEY'VE GONE OFF AND DONE
SOMETHING AND THEY'RE NOT EVEN
SURE WHAT THEY'RE DOING, BUT IF
THERE WAS SOME WAY TO GET THIS
DATA, IT WOULD BE REALLY GREAT
IN EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF THIS
PARTICULAR PROGRAM ON THE
BIOMEDICAL WORKFORCE.
SO IN THE WORKING GROUP ALSO
WANTED TO CONSIDER GIVEN THIS
PROGRAM HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR
QUITE A WHILE, ARE THERE LESSONS
THAT CAN BE LEARNED THAT WE CAN
THEN APPLY TO THE ONGOING B2B TO
TRY TO MAKE IT MORE IMPACTFUL
AND TO BE MORE EFFICIENT IN KIND
OF ITS SPENDING, AND SO WE
LOOKED AT THE DATA AND AT THIS
POINT I REALLY NEED TO THANK THE
TEAM BECAUSE WE ASKED THEM
PROBABLY A MILLION QUESTIONS AND
ASKED THEM TO CRUNCH THE DATA IN
DIFFERENT WAYS AND NOT THE WAY
THAT THEY DID IT BUT THE WAY WE
WANTED TO LOOK AT TO TRY AND SEE
IF WE COULD FIND SOMETHING THAT
WOULD BE USEFUL.
IT WAS REALLY HARD.
WHAT I'M SHOWING YOU HERE IS
THIS IS ONE OF THE FACTORS THAT
WE LOOKED AT WHERE WE LOOKED AT
FUNDING DURATION, AND WE SAW
THAT FUNDING DURATION HERE
DIDN'T SEEM TO HAVE A STRONG
EFFECT ON THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS
WHO TRANSFER.
SO THIS IS A LITTLE COMPLICATED
HERE, BUT THIS IS STUDENT-LEVEL
DATA DIVIDED UP INTO WHETHER
THEY WERE IN A PROGRAM WITH HE
15 OR MORE YEARS OF FOLLOW-UP OR
A PROGRAM THAT WAS OF SHORTER
DURATION AND HAD LESS FOLLOW-UP.
AND THE GOOD NEWS IS IT DIDN'T
SEEM TO MATTER THAT MUCH IN THAT
THE STUDENTS WERE STILL
TRANSFERRING AT ABOUT THE SAME
RATES, DEPENDING ON WHAT WAS
GOING ON, SO THERE WAS NO STRONG
EFFECT HERE.
THEN WE KEPT ASKING ALL THESE
OTHER QUESTIONS LIKE WHAT ELSE
CAN WE LEARN FROM THIS, IS THERE
AN OPTIMUM PROGRAM SIZE BECAUSE
LIKE PAM WAS SAYING, THESE
PROGRAMS WERE VERY
HETEROGENEOUS.
WE WANTED TO KNOW, LIKE, WAS
THERE SUCCESS IF THE STUDENT
TRANSFERRED TO AN INSTITUTION
THAT HAD A MARK O MARC, A RISE A
BUILD OR EVEN AN NSF PROGRAM, IS
THERE SOME RECOMMENDATION, IS
THERE SOME KIND OF BEST
PRACTICES, IS THERE
INSTITUTIONAL IMPACT, BOOT
CAMPS, PEER MENTORS, CAN WE SHOW
THAT THAT'S SUPER IMPORTANT?
THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE DATA ARE
JUST SUPER NOISY BECAUSE OF THIS
GREAT HETEROGENEITY IN THE WAY
THE PROGRAMS ARE RUN, THE WAY
THE PROGRAMS ARE FUNDED, THE
KIND OF PROGRAMMING THAT WAS
USED, THE WAY THAT THE STUDENTS
ARE PAID, AND SO NO MATTER HOW
HARD WE TRIED TO PUSH DEMA TO DO
THIS ANALYSIS FIRST, IT WAS VERY
DIFFICULT.
SO WHAT THE WORKING GROUP WOULD
LIKE TO RECOMMEND, WHICH WAS NOT
WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE TIME
THAT WE COULD DO, IS TO ANALYZE
THE EXISTING DATA FOR
STATISTICAL OUTLIERS.
PROGRAMS THAT ARE SUPER
SUCCESSFUL OR PROGRAMS THAT
UNFORTUNATELY MAY NOT HAVE DONE
AS WELL.
AND PERHAPS LOOK FOR ACTIVITY
THAT MIGHT ENHANCE OR DIMINISH
SUCCESS, BUT I THINK THAT'S MUCH
MORE COMPLICATED THAN THE TIME
THAT WE HAD AND THE DATA THAT IS
EVEN AVAILABLE.
AND WE WERE THINKING THAT COULD
REQUIRE QUALITATIVE CASE STUDIES
APPROACHES.
THE OTHER POINT THAT GOT BROUGHT
UP IS WHETHER OR NOT, WHICH
WOULD ALSO TAKE MORE TIME AND WE
MAY NOT HAVE THE DATA, IF WE
LOOKED AT INTERSECTIONAL DATA
ANALYSIS AND WE LOOKED AT A MUCH
MORE FINE GRAIN DETAIL OF THE
DATA THAT MAYBE WE COULD PULL
SOMETHING OUT THAT THE WORKING
GROUP WAS UNFORTUNATELY UNABLE
TO DO.
OKAY.
SO THAT WAS OUR RECOMMENDATION
THERE.
THEN WE TOOK A LOOK AT GOING
FORWARD, LOOKING AT THE
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE R
MECHANISM AND THE T MECHANISM,
WHETHER OR NOT THERE WERE KIND
OF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE
WANTED TO MAKE.
AND IN THIS CASE, WE WEREN'T
NECESSARILY DRAWING FROM DATA,
BUT WE WERE DRAWING FROM THE
EXPERTISE OF OUR WORKING GROUP,
WHICH INCLUDED PEOPLE WHO HAVE
WRITTEN THESE GRANTS, PEOPLE WHO
RUN THESE PROGRAMS, PEOPLE WHO
PARTICIPATED AS FACULTY MENTORS
AND PEOPLE WHO'VE REVIEWED THESE
PROGRAMS FOR TWD, PEOPLE WHO ARE
JUST GENERALLY FAMILIAR WITH
THESE TWD TRAINING MECHANISMS.
SO THIS TRANSITION FROM THE R
KIND OF MECHANISM TO THE T
MECHANISM HAPPENED IN 2019, AND
IT'S MEANT TO ALIGN THE BRIDGES
TO THE BACCALAUREATE WITH THE
OTHER NIGMS TRAINING MECHANISMS.
PART OF IT IS THE -- WE DIDN'T
HAVE THE DATA FROM THE T -- SO
WE WERE ESSENTIALLY LOOKING AT A
DINOSAUR PROGRAM AND TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT HOW TO INFORM THE
NEXT PROGRAM.
SO WHAT WE DID LOOK AT IS WE SAW
THE TRANSITION FROM THE R TO THE
T IS ACTUALLY GREAT NEWS BECAUSE
AT SOME LEVEL, THIS IS ABOUT THE
STUDENTS, AND THE STUDENT
SUPPORT NOW IS SO MUCH BETTER.
IT'S MUCH MORE EQUITABLE BECAUSE
IT USED TO BE THAT IF YOU WERE
IN THE BRIDGES PROGRAM AND YOU
WERE A COMMUNITY COLLEGE
STUDENT, YOU COULD BE WORKING
SIDE BY SIDE WITH SOMEBODY WHO
MIGHT BE IN A PROGRAM THAT'S
KIND OF FUNDED AT A STIPEND
LEVEL AND GETTING PAID
COMPLETELY DIFFERENTLY FROM
THEM.
SO WE FELT LIKE THIS WAS A GREAT
THING TO DO.
IT USED TO BE THAT STUDENTS WERE
PAID ONLY IF THEY SHOWED UP TO
DO THE WORK IN THE RESEARCH LAB,
THEY COULD GET ABOUT 20 HOURS A
WEEK DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR AND
40 HOURS A WEEK IN THE SUMMER,
BUT NOW THEY HAVE A STIPEND
THAT'S NRSA LEVEL, THAT INCLUDES
LIVING EXPENSE, HEALTH
INSURANCE, TUITION REMISSION,
WHICH IS VERY, VERY GOOD.
SO WE FELT LIKE BETTER STUDENT
SUPPORT IS A VERY POSITIVE
OUTCOME OF THIS TRANSITION.
THEN IT GETS A LITTLE
COMPLICATED BECAUSE THE TRUTH IS
BY GOING FROM AN R TO A T, THERE
ARE BUDGET MECHANISM DIFFERENCES
THAT ARE STRUCTURALLY DIFFERENT.
SO IT USED TO BE UNDER THE R
MECHANISM YOU COULD GET 300K
DIRECT COSTS PER YEAR, THAT WAS
A CAP.
AND THE BUDGET MECHANISM WAS
RELATIVELY FLEXIBLE.
STUDENTS ARE PAID HOURLY, SO
THEY WERE PAID OUT OF THAT 300K
AS WELL AS TRAINING-RO-RELATED
EXPENSES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
I THINK THE R25 MECHANISM
EXPLICITLY ALLOWED PEER
MENTORSHIP SUPPLEMENTAL COURSE
INSTRUCTORS, WHICH THEN PEOPLE
TENDED TO PUT IN PLACE BECAUSE
IT WAS ALLOWABLE.
UNDER THE T SUPPORT, THE AMOUNT
OF MONEY PEOPLE GET NOW IS
RELATED TO THE NUMBER OF SLOTS
BECAUSE STUDENTS ARE BEING PAID
A STIPEND.
AND THAT'S GOOD, THERE'S NO
OVERALL BUDGET CAP, SO YOU CAN
GROW A LARGER PROGRAM, MY GUESS
IS, IF YOU'RE SUCCESSFUL, BUT
THERE IS A CAP, THOUGH, OF
TRAINING-RELATED EXPENSES, SO
THIS IS SEPARATE FROM THE
STIPEND THAT COMES TO 10K A
TRAINEE, UP TO 100,000K IN
DIRECT COSTS.
SO KIND OF DRAWING FROM THE
WORKING GROUP AND WHAT THEY KNEW
ABOUT THE B2B PROGRAM GOING ON
RIGHT NOW, THERE WERE A COUPLE
RECOMMENDATIONS WE WANTED TO
MAKE THAT WERE RELATED TO THESE
BUDGET STRUCTURAL CHANGES THAT
WE THOUGHT WOULD BE IMPORTANT.
WE FELT LIKE BECAUSE THESE
TRAINING-RELATED EXPENSES ARE
NOW CAPPED, THEY ALSO SCALE WITH
THE SIZE OF THE NUMBER OF SLOTS
THAT PEOPLE ARE BEING GIVEN,
THERE ARE TEUMLY ACTUALLY TWO .
ONE IS THERE WAS NO LONGER THIS
IDEA YOU COULD PAY PEER MENTORS
AND SUPPLEMENTAL COURSE
INSTRUCTORS WHICH IS ACTUALLY
STILL ALLOWABLE, THAT THIS NEED
TO BE BETTER COMMUNICATED TO
GRANT APPLICANTS BECAUSE IT
SEEMED LIKE THERE WAS SOME LEVEL
OF CONFUSION OF WHAT COULD BE
USED AND WHAT COULD NO LONGER BE
USED.
AND SO THAT WAS THIS IDEA THAT
WE NEED TO COMMUNICATE BETTER
WITH GRANT APPLICANTS.
WE ALSO FELT LIKE BECAUSE
TRAINING-RELATED EXPENSES NOW
SCALE WITH THE NUMBER OF SLOTS
THAT PEOPLE NEED TO BE EFFICIENT
ABOUT WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING AS
TRAINING-RELATED MECHANISMS, AND
THAT IT WOULD BE GREAT TO
IDENTIFY BEST PRACTICES FROM
SUCCESSFUL B2B PROGRAMS AND
MAYBE COMMUNICATE THESE KIND OF
BEST PRACTICES TO APPLICANTS.
THERE WAS ALSO A CONCERN IN THE
WORKING GROUP THAT BECAUSE OF
THE BETTER STUDENT SUPPORT, IT
IS A ZERO SUM GAME, WE CAN'T
PRINT MONEY, THE NUMBER OF SLOTS
PER PROGRAM SEEMS TO BE GOING
DOWN IN THE T VERSUS THE R.
AND SO THE COMMITTEE WAS WORRIED
ABOUT WHETHER VERY SMALL
PROGRAMS MIGHT BE BELOW A
CRITICAL MASS FOR SUCCESS, AND
WOULD ENCOURAGE THE NIH TO
RECOMMEND ANALYZING PROGRAM SIZE
EFFECTS UNDER THE T MECHANISM,
PROBABLY SOONER RATHER THAN
LATER, BECAUSE WE WERE CONCERNED
ABOUT VERY, VERY SMALL PROGRAMS
AND THEIR IMPACTS.
AND THEN THE LAST THING THAT I
WANT TO BRING UP HERE WITH THE T
TO THE R IS THE WORKING GROUP IS
VERY, VERY PLEASED TO HEAR THAT
THERE ARE POSITIVE DATA
REPORTING CHANGES.
PART OF THE REASON IT WAS HARD
FOR US TO COME TO SOME OF THESE
CONCLUSIONS THAT WE WANTED TO
LOOK AT IS BECAUSE IN THE R25
MECHANISM, ONLY NEW AND
COMPETING PROGRAMS WERE REQUIRED
TO FIGURE OUT -- FILL OUT THIS
TABLE 8D WHICH TRACKED ALL OF
THE TRAINEES, WHICH IS WHY THERE
WAS NO STUDENT LEVEL DATA FOR
SOME OF THOSE PROGRAMS THAT PAM
POINTED OUT.
TO FILL OUT THAT TABLE, IT WAS
ONLY RECOMMENDED FOR PROGRESS
REPORTS.
THERE WAS ALSO SWITCHING IN THE
SOFTWARE THAT'S USED TO ATTRACT
THESE STUDENTS WHICH WOULD MAKE
IT BETTER.
UNDER THE T M MECHANISM, YOU'RE
NOW REQUIRED TO GIVE THE
INFORMATION ABOUT STUDENT
OUTCOMES, WHICH IS GREAT.
AND THERE'S NOW NEW SOFTWARE
THAT MAKES IT A LOT EASIER AND
STUDENT NOW ARE ALSO REQUIRED TO
HAVE AN ORCID I DID SO -- I'M
SORRY, I'M POINTER-INCOMPETENT.
HERE SO THAT WE CAN NOW TRACK
THEM BETTER.
SO WE THINK THAT THIS JOB THAT
WE WERE ASKED TO DO WILL BE A
LOT EASIER THE NEXT TIME AROUND.
WE'RE VERY HAPPY THERE'S THESE
NEW REPORTING REQUIREMENTS SO WE
RECOMMEND YOU USE THIS NEW DATA
TO TRY TO ADDRESS THE THINGS
THAT WE TRIED TO ASK THAT
APPARENTLY WE DISCOVERED ONCE WE
WERE WRAPPING UP OUR
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE
PREVIOUS EVALUATION HAD TRIED TO
ASK A LOT OF THE SAME QUESTIONS
TOO, AND THIS DATA IS JUST VERY
HARD TO GET WITH THE OLD
MECHANISM.
SO WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO A NEW
EVALUATION SOONER RATHER THAN
LATER.
AND SO I'LL PASS THIS BACK TO
PAM.
>>SO OVERALL THEN FOR OUR
WORKING GROUP FINDINGS, THERE'S
A LITTLE BIT OF OVERLAP, BUT WE
REALLY WANTED TO SAY THAT WE
THINK THE BRIDGES TO THE
BACCALAUREATE PROGRAM IS
SUCCESSFUL AND SHOULD BE
CONTINUED.
WE HAVE SOME EXPLICIT
SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS,
AND BASICALLY WE WANT TO FIND
OUT AS MUCH AS WE CAN PROBABLY
FROM THE QUALITATIVE STUDIES
FROM THE R25.
IN SOME WAYS IT'S A REALLY RICH
DATASET, AND IT WOULD BE
WONDERFUL TO FIND OUT WHAT KINDS
OF BEST PRACTICES CAN BE
OBTAINED THERE.
WE TALK ED A LITTLE BIT EARLIER
IN THE SESSION ABOUT WAYS THAT
NIGMS IS COMMUNICATING, AND WE
WANTED TO MAKE THIS MORE
EXPLICIT FOR THIS PARTICULAR
PROGRAM BECAUSE IT'S
COMPLICATED.
TO HAVE PARTNER PROGRAM, PARTNER
INSTITUTIONS WORKING TOGETHER IS
PERHAPS MORE CHALLENGING THAN
SOME OF THE OTHER KINDS OF
BUREAUCRACIES THAT WE ALL DEAL
WITH.
AND THEN LASTLY, WE REALLY
WANTED TO EXPLICITLY INDICATE
THAT WE WANT TO ENHANCE
DIVERSITY IN BIOMEDICAL
WORKFORCE AND COLLEC COLLECT THA
ON THE STEM DEGREES EARNED AND
THE OUTCOME AFTER GRADUATION.
ANOTHER ASPECT, AND THIS HAS NOT
BEEN REALLY DEALT WITH
PREVIOUSLY, BUT WE HAD
DR. SUZANNE BARBOUR WAS VERY
INVOLVED IN A SKILLED TECHNICAL
WORKFORCE EVALUATION VIA NSF,
AND THERE'S A LOT OF TRANSITION
HAPPENING IN THE BIOMEDICAL
EXTERNAL FIELD, AND THAT THERE
IS NOW A NEED FOR COMMUNITY
COLLEGE PREPARED EMPLOYEES, AND
IT'S SORT OF OUR CAUTION TO
ENSURE THAT THOSE STUDENT MAY BE
ABLE TO GO DIRECTLY -- COMMUNITY
COLLEGE STUDENTS AFTER GETTING
THEIR ASSOCIATE'S DEGREES MAYBE
COULD GO DIRECTLY INTO INDUSTRY.
HOWEVER, IT'S IMPORTANT IN MY
VIEW AND THAT OF THE WORKFORCE
THAT THESE DEGREES BE ONES THAT
COULD ALSO POTENTIALLY BE
TRANSFERRED TO A FOUR-YEAR
INSTITUTION, BECAUSE SOMETIMES
YOU HAVE SORT OF A DEAD END AND
THERE'S SOME MECHANISMS THAT ARE
BUILT IN THAT YOU CAN'T GET TO
THE FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTION.
ONE OF THE REALLY GOOD THINGS
ABOUT THAT WOULD BE THAT
STUDENTS MIGHT BE PAID BY THEIR
EMPLOYER THEN TO GO TO A
FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTION, SO THAT
WOULD TAKE CARE OF SOME OF THE
FUNDING ISSUES.
WE FELT THAT THIS IS SORT OF
BEYOND OUR SCOPE, BUT FELT THAT
IT WAS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO
HAVE NIGMS AND TWD CONSIDER
WHETHER OR NOT THERE MIGHTING
SOME AVENUES FOR THIS IN THE
FUTURE.
THANK YOU.
OH, SORRY.
MY BIG THANK YOU, OUR BIG THANK
YOU IS TO DEMA, THE DIVISION OF
DATA INTEGRATION MODELING AND
ANALYTICS, THE THREE INDIVIDUALS
ON THE LEFT WHO WE'RE TOLD HAD
DONE A LOT OF THE HEAVY LIFTING
AND THEN THE FOLKS ON THE RIGHT
WERE THE ONES THAT WERE OUR
INTERFACE AND CAN'T EXPRESS
ENOUGH, THEY JUST REALLY DID --
WE PUSHED THEM HARD AND THEY
GAVE US A TON OF DATA.
SO WE'RE VERY GRATEFUL FOR THAT.
THANK YOU.
>>THANK YOU SO MUCH TO THE
EVALUATION TEAM, REALLY TERRIFIC
WORK.
I'LL ASK PAM TO GO BACK TO HER
SEAT AND LINDA TO JOIN US AT THE
TABLE TO MAKE IT EASY TO ASK
QUESTIONS.
BUT THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
TERRI.
>>IT'S WONDERFUL.
I HAVE TO SAY, COMMUNITY
COLLEGES ARE SO IMPORTANT.
I HAD A COMMUNITY COLLEGE
TRANSFER STUDENT TO MY LAB AT
RUTGERS THAT PUBLISHED A FIRST
AUTHOR PAPER IN THE PROCEEDINGS
OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY.
THERE ARE GREAT STUDENTS THERE.
TWO POINTS IN THE ANALYSIS.
ONE IS THAT COMMUNITY COLLEGES
TOOK A MASSIVE HIT IN THEIR
ENROLLMENT IN THE EARLY STAGES
OF COVID.
IT WAS ABOUT A 10% DROP, AND SO
THE NEXT TIME YOU LOOK AT THE
DATA, THAT'S PROBABLY -- WE
SHOULD BE MINDFUL THAT THAT IS
AN EXPLICIT COVID IMPACT THAT WE
KNOW.
AND THEN THE SECOND ONE THAT I
THINK IS REALLY INTERESTING AS
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT DIVERSIFYING
THE WORKFORCE IS THE MAJOR GAP
IN GRADUATION RATES AT MANY
INSTITUTIONS BASED ON RACE.
AND THEY TEND -- THOSE
DIFFERENCES TEND TO NOT BE AS
LARGE FOR TRANSFER STUDENTS AT
MANY INSTITUTIONS, AND I THINK
LOOKING AT THAT, IF THERE'S A
WAY TO LOOK AT THAT EXPLICITLY,
IF YOU'RE SEEING NOT JUST THIS
INCREASE, BUT IF YOU'RE ALSO
SEEING IT IN TERMS OF MINDING
THAT GAP THAT WE SEE COULD BE
ALSO ANOTHER REALLY MAJOR
IMPACT.
>>SO YOU'RE SAYING THE GAP IS
LESS FOR TRANSFER STUDENTS THAN
FOR NON-TRANSFER STUDENTS?
>>I CAN -- I KNOW OF ONE
EXAMPLE IN PARTICULAR, JUST
BECAUSE I WAS AT THAT
INSTITUTION, BUT IT IS TRUE THAT
IF WE CAN GET THE STUDENTS TO
THE FOUR-YEAR COLLEGE, THEY DO
TEND TO PERFORM HIGHER AND THERE
DOES SEEM FOR MANY INSTITUTIONS
TO BE LESS OF A GAP FOR TRANSFER
STUDENTS BECAUSE THEY'VE SORT OF
BEEN VETTED THROUGH A VERY
DIFFICULT PATH THIS SIX TO EIGHT
YEARS, AND WE KNOW THAT TRANSFER
STUDENTS OFTEN END UP TAKING
MORE CREDIT HOURS THAN STUDENTS
THAT GO DIRECTLY INTO A
FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTION BECAUSE OF
THE ARCHAIC WAY THAT WE DO
TRANSFERS BETWEEN INSTITUTIONS,
AND SO THESE ARE HIGHLY
MOTIVATED STUDENTS.
>>LINDA, DO YOU WANT TO --
>>I WAS GOING TO SAY ONE OF THE
FACTORS WE DID LOOK AT ONCE THEY
TRANSFERRED, WAS THERE ANY
DIFFERENCES IN COMPLETION BY
RACE?
THERE WASN'T ANY, IT'S JUST THAT
THE DATA WERE ALSO NOISY SO WE
DIDN'T ACTUALLY SHOW THAT DATA,
BUT I THINK THAT SUPPORTS
EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
>>THE OTHER ASPECT WAS THAT IN
THE PROGRAMS, THEY WERE ACTUALLY
ASKED TO SHOW THAT THEY HAD
ARTICULATION AGREEMENTS, AND IN
THE T34, THEY'RE ACTUALLY
SUPPOSED TO ATTACH THOSE
AGREEMENTS.
SO I'M THINKING THAT BECAUSE,
YES, THE ISSUE OF TOO MANY UNITS
BEING TRANSFERRED IS A HUGE ONE.
>>NICE ANALYSIS.
THE OVERARCHING GOAL AS WAS
SHOWN ON ONE OF THE EARLIER
SLIDES WAS TO ENHANCE DIVERSITY
OF BIOMEDICAL WORKFORCE, AND SO
WITH THE ASSUMPTION THAT KID
GOING INTO COMMUNITY COLLEGES
ARE FROM LOWER SOCIOECONOMIC
BACKGROUNDS, SO DURING THE
ANALYSIS, I WAS EXPECTING TO SEE
SORT OF A BREAKDOWN ON
DIVERSITY, AND IF THAT GOAL WAS
MET BY THE END AND MAYBE YOU
COULD COMMENT ON HOW THAT CAME
UP.
>>SO IT WAS A DIVERSE POOL OF
STUDENTS THAT WE LOOKED AT, BOTH
BY RACE AND ETHNICITY.
THOSE THAT -- THERE WAS SOME
VARIATION DURING THAT TIME
PERIOD IN TERMS OF AGAIN
SELF-REPORTING FROM THE
STUDENTS.
SOMETIMES THE CATEGORY OF WHITE
AND UNKNOWN WERE VERY HIGH, OFF
THE CHARTS, AND WHEN THAT SORT
OF WENT AWAY, IT TURNED OUT THAT
MANY OF THOSE FOLKS ENDED UP
BEING IN THE HISPANIC STUDENTS,
SO ACTUALLY THE -- ALL OF THE
POPULATIONS ARE WELL REPRESENTED
IN TERMS OF THE ANALYSES, AND AS
LINDA POINTED OUT, THERE WERE NO
DIFFERENCES IN THEIR ABILITY TO
TRANSFER OR COMPLETE.
SO THE PROGRAM SEEMS TO BOTH
ENCOURAGE THE RECRUITMENT OF
STUDENTS THAT ARE DIVERSE AND
THEN ONCE THOSE STUDENTS ARE
THERE, THEY DO QUITE WELL.
WITHIN THAT PROGRAM.
AGAIN, THE DATA WASN'T REALLY
VERY CLEAN.
BUT AT LEAST IN TERMS OF
REPRESENTATION, THE
REPRESENTATION WAS QUITE GOOD,
PARTICULARLY WITH REGARDS TO
HISPANIC, BLACK, AND ASIAN
AMERICAN PACIFIC ISLANDERS,
NATIVE AMERICANS.
A LITTLE BIT LESS SO THAN NATIVE
AMERICANS.
>>BRENT.
>>FANTASTIC ANALYSIS, AND
YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, THIS
PROGRAM OCCUPIES AN ABSOLUTELY
CRITICAL SPACE FOR HELPING TO
DEVELOP THE WORKFORCE.
I DO HAVE A QUESTION, AND IS
THERE ANY ARTICULATED AGREEMENTS
INVOLVING ADMISSION WITH THIS
PROGRAM FROM THE TWO-YEAR TO THE
FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTION?
IN OTHER WORDS, IF A STUDENT IS
ENROLLED, DO THEY HAVE A
DIFFERENT PATH TO ADMISSION TO,
FOR EXAMPLE, COMPETITIVE MAJORS,
WHICH ARE STEM MAJORS?
>>THAT'S ACTUALLY SOMETHING
THAT I WOULDN'T KNOW ABOUT.
ALL I KNOW IS THAT INITIALLY
THEY WERE ENCOURAGED TO HAVE
ARTICULATION AGREEMENTS.
COMING IN BLINDLY, I WAS
ANTICIPATING THAT IT WAS BEING
DONE ON AN INSTITUTION TO
INSTITUTION BASIS AS OPPOSED TO
PROGRAMMATICALLY, BUT I DON'T
ACTUALLY KNOW THE ANSWER TO
THAT.
>>ALISON, DO YOU WANT TO JUMP
IN?
>>WE DON'T PUT ANYTHING
EXPLICITLY ON THE FUNDING
ANNOUNCEMENT THAT REQUIRES THAT.
IT'S PARTLY BECAUSE THERE ARE
COMPLEX PARTNERSHIPS, SO IT
COULD BE THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE
BEING THE MAIN GRANT HOLDER WITH
SEVERAL FOUR-YEAR COLLEGES OR IT
CAN GO THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
SO IT REALLY IS
CONTEXT-SPECIFIC, AND WE DO
OBVIOUSLY PUSH NOW FOR THE
ARTICULATION AGREEMENTS TO
SPECIFICALLY THINK ABOUT THINGS
LIKE TIME TO DEGREE, BUT IT AN
INTERESTING POINT ABOUT
ADMISSIONS.
WE CERTAINLY PUT LANGUAGE IN OUR
FUNDING ANNOUNCEMENTS AROUND
TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUR
ADMISSIONS PROCESSES ARE FAIR
AND TAKE IN A BROAD RANGE OF
CONSIDERATIONS BEYOND JUST
GRADES AND TEST SCORES, BUT IT'S
SOMETHING WE'LL THINK ABOUT FOR
THE BRIDGES FUNDING ANNOUNCEMENT
TO SEE IF WE CAN ENCOURAGE THE
PARTNERSHIPS TO PUT FORTH ANY
POLICIES THEY HAVE AROUND THIS.
>>I THINK IN PARTICULAR,
COMPUTER SCIENCE AND
ENGINEERING DEGREES, PROGRAM,
GENERALLY TAKE FEWER TRANSFER
STUDENTS BECAUSE OF THE
COMPETITIVENESS OF THE ON-CAMPUS
VERSIONS.
SO IT WOULD BE SOMETHING TO
THINK ABOUT.
>>DANIELLE.
>>I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD
SAY MORE ABOUT THE CONTROL GROUP
USED IN THE ANALYSIS, SO THE
NATIONAL STUDENT CLEARINGHOUSE,
SHOULD I THINK OF THAT AS LIKE A
RANDOM SAMPLE OF PEOPLE IN
COMMUNITY COLLEGE?
AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, I
WOULDN'T NECESSARILY THINK OF
THE BRIDGES STUDENTS AS BEING A
RANDOM SAMPLE, LIKE YOU'D HAVE
TO APPLY AND SHOW AN INTEREST IN
THE PROGRAM.
AND SO IF YOU COULD JUST SAY
MORE ABOUT HOW THAT GAP WOULD
CHANGE, IF WE TRIED TO CONTROL
FOR SOMETHING.
SO THE IDEA BEING WHAT IF THE
BRIDGES STUDENTS ARE CREAM
SKIMMED, BETTER THAN THE AVERAGE
POOL, SO I THINK ANYTHING YOU
CAN DO TO KIND OF ADDRESS THAT
POTENTIAL CONCERN I THINK WILL
MAKE THE ANALYSIS STRONGER.
>>THAT'S ACTUALLY SOMETHING
THAT THE WORKING GROUP WORRIED
ABOUT.
ARE WE ONLY ENHANCING THOSE WHO
ALREADY WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, --
>>I'M ASKING A SLIGHTLY
DIFFERENT QUESTION.
LIKE YOU COULD IMAGINE IF I WERE
TO BE CRITICAL OF THIS ANAL
CIRCLES I WOULD SAY MAYBE
THERE'S NOT A CAUSAL EFFECT,
THAT THESE STUDENTS ARE
MOTIVATED AND THEY WOULD HAVE
ENDED UP TRANSFERRING EVEN IN
THE ABSENCE OF THIS PROGRAM.
SO ARGUING FOR THAT EFFECT, I
THINK IT WOULD BE USEFUL TO
COMPARE COMPARABLE STUDENTS AT
THE OUTSET.
>>WE TALKED ABOUT THAT.
ONE OF THE ASPECTS PARTICULARLY
AT THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE
PARTNER, WHICH IS SOLELY 1P.I.,
TALKED ABOUT THE WAY THEY
RECRUITED, SO AGAIN, IT IS
SELF-MOTIVATED STUDENTS, THEY
WERE REACHING OUT TO ALL
STUDENTS SO IT WASN'T
PRESELECTED IN THAT WAY.
HOWEVER, AGAIN, THE HETEROJE
NATI -- THEHETEROGENEITY OF THES
CAN'T BE OVERSTATED.
ONE OF OUR COLLEAGUES FROM A
FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTION FELT HE
WAS GETTING STUDENTS TOWARD THE
END OF THEIR COMMUNITY COLLEGE
TIMING SO THAT THEY WERE -- YOU
KNOW, THEIR LAST SEMESTER AT
COMMUNITY COLLEGE.
SO HOW MUCH DID THIS PROGRAM
HELP THEM WHEN THEY HAD ALREADY
SORT OF GONE THROUGH ALL THE
HOOPS TOGETHER.
SO I'M NOT ANSWERING YOUR
QUESTION DIRECTLY.
I'M SUGGESTING THAT, ARE A, WE
DON'T KNOW, AND B, OUR SENSE WAS
THESE CAN BE MORE MOTIVATED
STUDENTS OR MORE AWARE STUDENTS
OR -- WAS THAT THE ANGLE YOU
WERE GOING FOR?
>>I JUST THINK DATA COLLECTION
GOING FORWARD IN TERMS OF
EVALUATION TO GET YOUR INITIAL
GPA OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN
YOUR FIRST YEAR OF COMMUNITY
COLLEGE AND TRY TO COMPARE THAT.
>>AND THERE WAS NO DATA
AVAILABLE FOR THAT.
LINDA, DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS?
>>I WAS GOING TO SAY, THERE
WERE SOME COMPARISONS THAT WERE
DONE WHERE, AGAIN, THESE AREN'T
PERFECT CONTROLS BUT LOOKING AT
INSTITUTIONAL BASELINES AS WELL.
SO COMMUNITY COLLEGE IS ACTUALLY
A WORD THAT DESCRIBES ALL KINDS
OF THINGS.
AND WHEN WE TRY TO LOOK THERE,
GIVEN THE SMALL AMOUNT OF DATA
THAT WE HAD, WE COULD SEE AN
IMPACT.
I GUESS THE FLIP SIDE, AND THIS
IS MY PERSONAL VIEW, IS THAT
THEY MIGHT BE DRAWING THE BEST
AND THE BRIGHTEST FROM THE
COMMUNITY COLLEGE, BUT IS THAT
REALLY -- SO YOU'RE SAYING THE
IMPACT IS SMALL, BUT IF WE
DIDN'T HAVE THIS SUPPORT SYSTEM
FOR THE BEST AND BRIGHTEST IN
THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE, WOULDN'T
THAT BE A SHAME?
>>OH, I'M NOT DISAGREEING WITH
THAT.
I'M SIMPLY SAYING IT'S POSSIBLE
THAT EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF THE
PROGRAM, SOME OF THESE PEOPLE
WOULD HAVE DONE THE SAME THING.
SO YOU'RE SORT OF TALKING ABOUT
WHICH STUDENTS WE TARGET, AND
I'M NOT DISAGREEING WITH THERE
BEING PROGRAMS TO SUPPORT SORT
OF STUDENTS ACROSS THE
DISTRIBUTION WITHIN COMMUNITY
COLLEGES.
THIS IS ABOUT THE CAUSAL EECT.
EFFECT.>>ABSOLUTELY, WE DID TAT
ABOUT HOW IT WOULD BE GREAT TO
GO THROUGH AND FIND STUDENTS OF
THE SAME GPA AND CREATE A
CONTROL GROUP AND COMPARE THAT,
BUT WE JUST DIDN'T HAVE THAT
KIND OF DATA.
>>AND ONE LAST KIND OF HOBBY
HORSE COMMENT, I THINK GIVEN
THAT WE ARE GIVING INSTITUTIONS
MONEY, I DON'T THINK IT'S
TERRIBLE FOR US TO HAVE DATA
REPORTING AS PART OF THE STRINGS
ASSOCIATED WITH THAT MONEY.
>>IF I MAY, IT WAS INTERESTING
THAT, AGAIN, THE KINDS OF
INSTITUTIONAL BACKBONE THAT
EXISTS IN THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE
OFTEN IS NOT ORIENTED TOWARDS
THIS KIND OF A PROGRAM OR THIS
KIND OF ANALYSIS.
AND THE INDIVIDUAL WHO'S THE
P.I. OFTEN IS, YOU KNOW, ASKS
THAT WE REFER TO AS CHIEF BOTTLE
WASHER BESIDES EVERYTHING ELSE.
THEY'RE THE INSTITUTIONAL
REPORTING MECHANISM, THEY DID
THE RECRUITING, THEY DO THE
RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE FOUR-YEAR
INSTITUTIONS.
SO THOSE OF US IN A FOUR-YEAR
INSTITUTION ACTUALLY FELT WE
WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE
REPORTING BURDENS THAT WERE
BEING PLACED ON THE COMMUNITY
COLLEGE BECAUSE, AGAIN, IN TERMS
OF TRACKING, THAT'S WHERE THEY
START, IS IN THE COMMUNITY
COLLEGES, AND SOME OF THESE --
SOME COMMUNITY COLLEGES DON'T
HAVE INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW
BOARDS, NOT THAT IT'S
NECESSARILY THAT YOU'D HAVE TO
GO THROUGH IT, BUT THERE'S --
IT'S CLEARLY REALLY STRUCTURALLY
SITUATED IN A DIFFERENT WAY.
PERHAPS ANOTHER WAY TO SAY THIS
IS TO FACTOR IN WHAT KIND OF
DATA WE WANT FROM THEM AND
WHETHER OR NOT MAYBE --
PARTICULARLY IF IT'S AT THE
COMMUNITY LEVEL, TO THINK ABOUT
HOW IT COULD BE FUNDED AS A
DISCRETE LINE.
>>MAYBE ONE MORE QUESTION.
PAOLA.
>>I LOVE THIS PROGRAM.
I WORK WITH STUDENTS FROM THIS
PROGRAM, AND I WENT TO COMMUNITY
COLLEGE, I WASN'T PART OF THIS
PROGRAM BUT I LOVE THIS PROGRAM.
I WAS JUST WONDERING, CAN I GIVE
A COMMENT -- QUICK COMMENT AND
THEN A QUESTION?
THE QUICK COMMENT IS, FOR THE
SUCCESS RATE, YES, WE WANT TO
SEE HOW MANY TRANSFERRED, BUT I
THINK MAYBE ALSO SUCCESS IS IF
THIS PROGRAM HELPED THEM GET A
JOB, RIGHT, AFTER FINISHING
THEIR TWO-YEAR COLLEGE.
BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S A BIG
IMPACT THAT IT CAN HAVE.
AND FOR MY QUESTION, SO THERE
WERE SOME SCHOOLS THAT HAD THE
R25 FOR A WHILE, AND THEN
DEPARTMENT MAKE TO THE T34 AND I
WAS WONDERING IF WE HAVE ANY
INFORMATION ABOUT THOSE SCHOOLS.
DID THEY APPLY AND NOT GET IT OR
SHOULD WE GO BACK AND JUST SEE
LIKE WHAT HAPPENED, WHY DID YOU
NOT RENEW?
ESPECIALLY IF THEY WERE
LONG-RUNNING.
>>SO IF I MAY, ALL OF THE DATA
THAT I SHOWED ON THE SLIDE WAS
ONLY THE R25 SO MANY OF THOSE
DIDN'T REAPPLY, AND THERE WAS
SOME SENSE THAT SOME OF THIS WAS
DUE TO THE HEADACHES THAT PEOPLE
HAD TO ADMINISTER THE GRANTS.
THAT'S VERY ANECDOTAL.
THERE WAS NO DATA SHOWN FOR THE
T34.
SO WE HAVE NO INFORMATION OF
WHICH OF THOSE PROGRAMS HAVE
CONTINUED ON OR NOT.
WE KEPT THE ANALYSIS COMPLETELY
SEPARATE.
>>I THINK IT MAY BE WORTH JUST
IF WE SEE THAT THERE WERE A LOT
OF T35s THAT DIDN'T -- T25s
THAT DIDN'T TRANSFER, JUST TO
SEE WHY NOT, BECAUSE WE MAY --
MAYBE TO HELP THEM CONTINUE,
BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAVE THE
CULTURE AND THE INSTITUTIONAL
RECORD.
>>TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT, THAT'S
WHY WE WERE TALKING ABOUT
COMMUNICATION, BECAUSE I THINK
THERE WAS SOME UNCERTAINTY ABOUT
HOW TO -- AS WE CHANGE TO A
DIFFERENT BUDGETARY SITUATION,
THE PIs AREN'T NECESSARILY
SCHOOLED IN BUDGETARY ANALYSIS,
SO THEY MAY HAVE BEEN SORT OF
THINKING, OH, WE CAN'T DO THE
THINGS WE DID BEFORE.
AND TALKING AMONG OURSELVES, THE
UPTICK WAS YES, ACTUALLY IT'S
POSSIBLE, BUT IT GOING TO BE IN
A DIFFERENT BUDGET CATEGORY, AND
THAT SEEMED TO MAYBE STRIP SOME
OF THE PI'S BACKGROUND, AND
THAT'S WHY WE'RE SUGGESTING SOME
DIRECT COMMUNICATION WITH
POTENTIAL -- YES.
>>CERTAINLY.
LAST QUESTION.
>>IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
THE DIRECTORS OF THESE PROGRAMS
TO MEET EACH OTHER?
IS THERE A COMMUNICATION
MECHANISM?
>>YES, THERE'S A VERY ACTIVE
TWD PROGRAM DIRECTORS'
ORGANIZATION AND THERE'S A SORT
OF HIGHER ORDER PERSON WHO LEADS
IT AND THEN THERE ARE SUBGROUPS
THAT FORM AND SO THEY HAVE --
THEY MEET -- AND -- CAMPS ARE A
MAJOR MEETING PLACE FOR MANY OF
THESE PROGRAM DIRECTORS, BUT
THEY ALSO -- ONE OF THE POSITIVE
THINGS ABOUT COVID IS THAT
PEOPLE REALIZE THEY CAN -- IN
OFF TIMES TOO, SO THEY ARE
GETTING TOGETHER THROUGHOUT THE
YEAR.
IT'S AN IMPRESSIVE ORGANIZATION.
THEY SHARE EFFECTIVE PRACTICES
AND WE TRIED HARD TO ENGENDER A
SENSE OF COMMUNITY RATHER THAN
COMPETITION AND THAT WE'RE
TRYING TO LIFT ALL BOATS AND
SHARE EFFECTIVE PRACTICES.
SO THAT'S VERY POSITIVE THING
THAT'S HAPPENING IN THE
COMMUNITY.
>>OKAY.
GREAT.
WELL, I WANT TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE AGAIN.
THIS WAS REALLY AN INCREDIBLY
USEFUL REPORT.
WE WILL, AS WE ALWAYS DO, HAVE A
RESPONSE, WHAT THE INSTITUTE
WILL DO BASED ON YOUR
RECOMMENDATIONS, EITHER AT THE
NEXT COUNCIL OR THE COUNCIL
AFTER THAT, AND WE'LL POST ALL
OF THAT ON OUR WEBSITE AND OUR
EVALUATIONS PAGE AS WE ALWAYS
DO.
SO THANK YOU AGAIN, REALLY VERY,
VERY HELPFUL.
WE'RE NOW GOING TO MOVE TO THE
CONCEPT CLEARANCES AND I'M GOING
TO JUST STAY HERE IF THAT'S OKAY
WITH EVERYBODY TO DO THOSE.
AS I'VE TOLD THE NEW FOLKS AND
THE OLD FOLKS KNOW THAT IN ORDER
TO REISSUE A PROGRAM OR TO START
A NEW PROGRAM, WE NEED TO
DISCUSS IT WITH COUNCIL, THEN
GET COUNCIL'S FORMAL APPROVAL,
WHICH IS CALLED A CONCEPT
CLEARANCE.
WE'RE GOING TO DO SEVERAL
REISSUES RIGHT NOW OF EXISTING
PROGRAMS.
ALL OF THEM WITHOUT MAJOR
CHANGES.
I'LL GIVE YOU A BRIEF
PRESENTATION, VERY BRIEF, ONE
SLIDE ON EACH ONE, GIVE YOU AN
OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE COMMENTS IF
YOU WANT, AND THEN WE'LL TAKE A
VOTE ON EACH ONE IN TURN SO
THAT'S HOW IT WILL WORK.
SO THE FIRST IS ACTUALLY TWO
PROGRAMS AT ONCE.
IT'S THE U. RISE AND THE MARC
PROGRAM, THE UNDERGRADUATE
DIVERSITY ENHANCING PROGRAMS.
YOU ACTUALLY HEARD PAM MENTION
THIS, THESE PROGRAMS IN THEIR
PRESENTATION.
SO THE GOAL OF BOTH U. RISE AND
MARC ARE TO HELP BUILD A DIVERSE
POOL OF UNDERGRADUATES WOULD
COMPLETE THEIR
BACCALAUREATE DEGREES AND THEN
TRANSITION INTO RESEARCH FOCUSED
HAYER DEGREE PROGRAMS AND
HOPEFULLY GRADUATE FROM THOSE
PROBLEMS WITH AN OVERALL GOAL OF
BUILDING DIVERSITY AND
EXCELLENCE IN THE BIOMEDICAL
RESEARCH ENTERPRISE.
THE PROGRAMS, SIMILAR TO WHAT
YOU HEARD ABOUT THE T34 VERSION,
THESE ARE, IN FACT, BOTH T34s,
ARE TRAINING GRANTS, THEY
PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR THE STUDENTS
IN TERMS OF STIPENDS, IN TERMS
OF TUITION REMISSION, BENEFIT,
HEALTH BENEFITS, ET, MONEY FOR
OTHER ACTIVITIES TO SUPPORT
MENTORING, DIDACTIC ACTIVITIES,
ET CETERA.
SO THE REASON THERE ARE TWO
PROGRAMS, U-RISE AND MARC, IS
BECAUSE THEY TARGET DIFFERENT
INSTITUTION TYPES.
THE U-RISE PROGRAM IS WHAT WE
CALL RESEARCH ACTIVE
INSTITUTIONS, INSTITUTIONS THAT
HAVE LESS THAN $7.5 MILLION IN
NIH RESEARCH PROJECT GRANT
FUNDING.
THE MARC PROGRAM IS FOR THE
RESEARCH INTENSIVE INSTITUTIONS
WHICH IS MORE THAN THAT LEVEL OF
FUNDING.
AND THEY'RE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT
ORGANIZATIONS IN THE PROGRAMS
BECAUSE THEY'RE TARGETING
INSTITUTIONS WITH DIFFERENT
RESEARCH BASIS AT THAT POINT.
THE PROGRAM IS ONLY GOING TO
HAVE MINOR CHANGES THAT WE'RE
PROPOSING, WHICH IS TO UPDATE
AND SIMPLIFY THE ATTACHMENTS IN
TEMPLES WHAT WE'RE REQUIRING OR
ALLOWING THE APPLICANTS TO PUT
IN THEIR MATERIALS IN THE --
ITSELF AND IN THE APPENDIX AND
ALSO IN TERMS OF LETTER
REQUIREMENTS.
WE'RE TRYING TO SIMPLIFY IT FOR
THE APPLICANTS AND FOR THE
REVIEWERS.
ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS ON THOSE PROGRAMS?
>>I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THIS
CONCEPT FOR FURTHER DEVELOPMENT
AS FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES.
IS ANYONE OPPOSED?
I'M WATCHING THE PEOPLE ONLINE
TOO.
OKAY, WE ARE UNANIMOUSLY
APPROVED.
>>THANK YOU.
SO WE'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH
REISSUING THOSE NOTICES OF
FUNDING OPPORTUNITY.
THE NEXT ONE IS THE SUPPORT FOR
RESEARCH EXCELLENCE OR SURE
AWARDS.
YOU MAY RECALL THAT BASED ON THE
EVALUATION OF THE FORMER SCORE
PROGRAM, WE SUNSETTED THAT
PROGRAM AND REPLACED IT WITH
THIS PROGRAM, SURE.
THE GOAL OF SURE IS TO SUPPORT
RESEARCH CAPACITY BUILDING AT
ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS AND
THROUGH FUNDING INVESTIGATOR
INITIATED RESEARCH IN VARIOUS
BIOMEDICAL AREAS WITH RELEVANCE
TO NIH, AND SME SPECIFICALLY THA
SEARCH GRANTS PROVIDE SUPPORT
FOR FACULTY INVESTIGATORS IN TWO
CATEGORIES: THE OVERALL SURE
AWARDS ARE FOR PIs WHO DON'T
HAVE ACTIVE NIH RESEARCH PROJECT
GRANTS BUT MAY HAVE HAD THEM IN
THE PAST.
AND THE SURE FIRST AWARD IS FOR
INVESTIGATORS WHO HAVEN'T HAD
ANY MAJOR PEER REVIEWED
EXTERNALLY FUNDED RESEARCH
GRANTS.
SO TO GET THEM STARTED.
THE AWARDS REQUIRE STUDENT
PARTICIPATION IN THE FUNDED
RESEARCH.
THAT'S A DIFFERENCE WITH THE OLD
SCORE PROGRAM.
AND WE DON'T PROPOSE ANY
SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES TO THE
PROGRAM AT THIS STAGE, JUST TO
REISSUE IT SO PEOPLE CAN
CONTINUE APPLYING FOR GRANTS.
DO I HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS?
PAOL ASM.
>>IS THIS PROGRAM ALSO WHERE
YOU CAN REAPPLY?
BECAUSE I REMEMBER WITH SCORE --
>>EXCELLENT POINT.
THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS WE
CHANGED AS WELL, THAT PEOPLE CAN
REAPPLY.
THE SURE FIRST, THEY CAN'T, BUT
THEN THEY CAN APPLY FOR THE
SURE, AND THE SURE IS RENEWABLE.
ONE OF THE MAJOR DEFICIENCIES OF
THE SCORE PROGRAM THAT THE GROUP
THAT EVALUATED IT PERCEIVED WAS,
IT WAS GEARED TOWARDS THE
FACULTY TRANSITIONING TO R01s,
AND MANY OF THE FACULTY ARE AT
UNDERGRADUATE-FOCUSED
INSTITUTIONS AND IT TURNED OUT
TO BE A TOTALLY UNREALISTIC
GOAL.
BUT AS YOU SAID, THEY WEREN'T
RENEWABLE BECAUSE THEY WERE
SUPPOSED TO GO GET AN R01, AND I
THINK ONLY 4% OF PEOPLE WHO GOT
SCORE GRANTS HAD AN R01 TO ZO
THAT WASN'T REALLY WORKING.
THIS IS A STAND-ALONE GRANT THAT
IS RENEWABLE AND IS SUPPOSED TO
SUPPORT -- CAN SUPPORT THEIR
RESEARCH FOR SIGNIFICANT PERIODS
OF TIME, AGAIN FOE KUTION ON FON
STUDENT PARTICIPATION IN THAT
RESEARCH.
>>I MOVE WE APPROVE THIS
CONCEPT FOR FUTURE FUNDING
OPPORTUNITIES.
ANY OPPOSED?
WE'RE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
>>EXCELLENT.
THANK YOU.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
THEN THERE'S THE ACADEMIC
RESEARCH ENHABSMENT AWARD, AREA.
THESE ARE THE R15 GRANTS FOCUSED
ON UNDERGRADUATE INSTITUTIONS,
AND THEY SUPPORT SMALL SCALE
RESEARCH PROJECTS AT UNDER
GRADUATE FOCUSED ACADEMIC
INSTITUTIONS THAT RECEIVE
LIMITED NIH FUNDING.
THEY PROVIDE BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH
EXPERIENCES FOR UNDERGRADUATE
STUDENTS, THERE'SLY THEIR MAIN
GOAL S TO LET FACULTY AT THESE
INSTITUTIONS DO RESEARCH WITH
UNDERGRADUATES AND TO STRENGTHEN
THE RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT AT
THOSE INSTITUTIONS.
SO THE MAJOR CHANGE OR REALLY
MINOR CHANGE WE PLAN FOR THIS IS
TO ADD THE PLAN FOR ENLANSING
DIVERSE PERSPECTIVES OR EDP TO
THE APPLICATION, SO THIS IS THE
APPLICANTS HAVE TO SAY HOW THEY
ARE INCREASING THE DIVERSITY AND
PERSPECTIVES THAT WILL BE TAKEN
INTO ACCOUNT AND INCORPORATED
INTO THE RYE SEARCH PROJECT, AND
THEY CAN DO THAT IN A WIDE
VARIETY OF DIFFERENT WAYS.
BUT THE IDEA AGAIN IS TO IMPROVE
THE RESEARCH BY KEEPING IT FROM
BEING NARROWLY DONE AND THOUGHT
ABOUT BY PEOPLE WITH VERY
SIMILAR BACKGROUNDS AND
PERSPECTIVES AND BROADEN THE
THINKING AND THE EXPERIENCES AND
BACKGROUNDS OF THE PEOPLE OR THE
KINDS OF RESEARCH THAT'S BEING
DONE.
ALSO TO CLARIFY THE REVIEW
CRITERIA FOR ENGAGING
UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS IS
SOMETHING THAT WILL HAPPEN HERE.
>>I MOVE WE APPROVE THIS
CONCEPT FOR FURTHER DEVELOPMENT
AS A FUNDING OPPORTUNITY.
ANY OPPOSED?
UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
>>EXCELLENT.
SO I THINK THAT'S THE LAST
SLIDE, RIGHT?
OKAY, TERRIFIC.
SO WE NOW HAVE A MINUTE OR TWO
FOR ANY OPEN DISCUSSION.
WE DID INVITE MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC AND PROFESSIONAL
SOCIETIES WHO WERE IN ATTENDANCE
TO MAKE COMMENTS IF THEY WANTED
TO, BUT DIDN'T GET ANY TAKERS,
BUT IF ANYONE HAS LAST MINUTE
CHANGE OF HEART, THEY'RE WELCOME
TO APPROACH THE PODIUM.
BUT IN THE PAST, THAT'S HOW
WE'VE WORKED AT THESE IN-PERSON
MEETINGS, THAT REPRESENTATIVES
OF OUR CONSTITUENT SOCIETIES
HAVE SOMETIMES MADE COMMENTS.
AND WE CERTAINLY WELCOME THEM TO
DO SO AT FUTURE MEETINGS WHEN
WE'RE IN PERSON.
DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANYTHING ELSE
THEY'D LIKE TO BRING UP, THINGS
THEY THINK WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT
IN THE FUTURE, OTHER ISSUES?
PAM.
>>SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT
I'M CLOSE TO THE END OF MY
ROTATION --
>>NO, DON'T SAY IT.
YOU MAKE ME CRY.
>>IT BEEN VERY INSTRUCTIVE FOR
ME TO SEE THE EVOLUTION OF
WHAT'S BEEN TAKING PLACE IN
NIGMS, AND IT'S REALLY GOOD TO
SEE INCREMENTAL CHANGES THAT ARE
MEANT TO IMPROVE WHAT WE DO AND
HOW WE DO IT, AND SO I JUST
WANTED TO MAKE THAT OBSERVATION
BECAUSE YOU CAN ONLY DO THAT AS
YOUR TIME IS STARTING TO
DISAPPEAR.
>>THANK YOU, PAM, AND YOU'VE
BEEN AMAZING TO HAVE ON COUNCIL
AND WE SAW SOME OF THE RESULTS
OF YOUR WORK JUST NOW.
ANY OTHER THOUGHTS, COMMENTS?
ALL RIGHT.
IN THAT CASE, WE'RE GOING TO BREAK FOR LUNCH.