2012-01-18

[DIV28SUPER] FW: APA Seeks Your Input on NIH's RFI "Input into the Deliberations of the Advisory Committee to the NIH Director Working Group on Diversity in the Biomedical Research Workforce"

 

 

Dear APA Division, Board and Committee Colleagues:

 

The APA Science and Public Interest Directorates seek your input as we prepare APA's response to the following Request for Information from the NIH Working Group on Diversity in the Biomedical Research Workforce. As you may know, NIH commissioned a report, Race, Ethnicity, and NIH Research Awards, that was published in Science last August documenting racial disparities in R01 success rates. In response, NIH established a Working Group on Diversity in the Biomedical Research Workforce, which has been charged with focusing on five key transition points in the pipeline: (i) entry into graduate degree programs; (ii) the transition from graduate degree to post-doctoral fellowship; (iii) the appointment from a post-doctoral position to the first independent scientific position; (iv) the award of the first independent research grant from NIH or equivalent in industry; and (v) award of tenure in an academic position or equivalent in an industrial setting. The Committee will provide concrete recommendations to the NIH Director on ways to improve the retention of underrepresented minorities, persons with disabilities, and persons from disadvantaged backgrounds through these critical periods. The DBRWG's analysis will include both the NIH intramural research community and the NIH extramural research community. The Committee is also seeking comments identifying the potential factors in the peer review process that might contribute to the disparities in award funding.

 

In September of 2011, APA sent an initial response to NIH Director Francis Collins recommending that NIH take a scientific approach to identifying the causes of the disparity in award success, encouraging any recommendations to include measurable outcomes and that the agency utilize the full breadth of the social and behavioral sciences in evaluating the role of bias in peer review. 

 

As the deadline for comments is Friday, February 24th, we would appreciate receiving your feedback to Karen Studwell, Senior Legislative and Federal Affairs Officer, at kstudwell@apa.org  by Friday, February 17th. You may also provide your own comments to the NIH via their website to share your perspective as independent investigators, scientists who have been supported by NIH training grants, experienced mentors, and members of study sections.  If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Karen Studwell or Diane Elmore, Associate Executive Director for Government Relations for Public Interest at delmore@apa.org.  

  

Sincerely,

 

Karen Studwell, J.D.

Senior Legislative and Federal Affairs Officer

American Psychological Association

Science Government Relations Office

750 First Street, NE

Washington, DC 20002

T: 202-336-5585

F: 202-336-6063

kstudwell@apa.org

 

Diane Elmore, PhD, MPH

Associate Executive Director

Director, Congressional Fellowship Program

Government Relations Office

Public Interest Directorate

American Psychological Association

750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242

Tel: 202.336.6104 |  Fax: 202.336.6063

email: delmore@apa.org | www.apa.org

 

Request for Information (RFI): Input into the Deliberations of the Advisory Committee to the NIH Director Working Group on Diversity in the Biomedical Research Workforce

________________________________________

Notice Number: NOT-OD-12-031

Key Dates

Release Date: January 10, 2012

Response Date:  February 24, 2012

Issued by

National Institutes of Health (NIH)

Purpose

This Notice is a time-sensitive Request for Information (RFI) requesting input into the deliberations of the Advisory Committee to the NIH Director Working Group on Diversity in the Biomedical Research Workforce.

 

Background

 

The Advisory Committee to the NIH Director (ACD) has established a working group to examine diversity in the biomedical research workforce (see http://acd.od.nih.gov/DBR.asp for charge and roster) and provide concrete recommendations to the ACD and the NIH Director on ways to  enhance diversity throughout the various research career stages, particularly with regard to underrepresented minorities, persons with disabilities, and persons from disadvantaged backgrounds. The Working Group on Diversity in the Biomedical Research Workforce has considered the evidence presented in "Race, Ethnicity, and NIH Research Awards" published in the August 2011 edition of Science and additional data provided by the NIH. This data shows that R01 applications from Black or African American PhD applicants between 2000 and 2006 did significantly worse than those applications from White applicants, even after controlling for observable characteristics. The article and a corresponding policy piece by NIH Director Francis Collins and NIH Deputy Director Lawrence Tabak can be found athttp://www.sciencemag.org/hottopics/race-nihfunding/. 

 

The Working Group would like to gather input from various sources, including extramural and intramural researchers, academic institutions, industry, and the public, to help inform the development of recommendations to present to the ACD and the NIH Director on actions the NIH can take to increase the diversity of the biomedical research workforce.

In its initial deliberations, the working group identified the following issues as important to consider when developing recommendations:

•             Biomedical Research Workforce Pipeline

o             The appropriate transition points where NIH's training, career development and research grant programs could most effectively cultivate diversity in the biomedical research workforce

             Entry into graduate degree programs

             Transition from graduate degree to post-doctoral fellowships

             Appointment from a post-doctoral position to the first independent scientific position

             Award of the first independent research grant from NIH or equivalent in industry

             Award of tenure in an academic position, at the NIH, or the equivalent in an industrial setting

o             The role of mentorship in the training and success of biomedical researchers throughout their careers

             Development of relationships between professional societies, institutions, and individuals to develop mentoring programs

             Creation and expansion of institutional mentoring programs

             Mentoring of applicants and preparation of applications prior to submission

o             The influence of role models whose qualities and characteristics can positively affect the training and success of underrepresented biomedical researchers through their careers

o             The role of NIH messaging in encouraging underrepresented researchers to apply for NIH fellowships and grants

o             The role of institutional infrastructure support and climate as a factor in the success of underrepresented researchers

•             Factors  in the Review Process

o             The potential role of institutional affiliation, academic pedigree, and various conscious and unconscious factors on review outcomes

             Exploration of the possible influences of racial, ethnic, gender, affinity, or other biases

             Research on the NIH Peer Review system to determine appropriate methods or interventions to identify and if necessary redress bias, including efforts to anonymize applications or test the effects of unconscious bias training on outcomes. 

Information Requested

 

To ensure a thorough and comprehensive evaluation of the issues underlying the diversity of the biomedical research workforce, input  is being sought from the biomedical research community, including students, postdoctoral fellows, scientists, scientific societies, and NIH grantee institutions, as well as from the general public.   Input is sought for each of the areas identified above and any other items the working group might consider.

•             For any of the areas identified above and any other specific areas you believe are worthy of consideration by the working group, please identify the critical issues(s) and impact(s) on institutions, scientists, or both.

•             Please identify and explain which of the issues you identified are, in your opinion, the most important for the working group to address and why

•             Please comment on any specific ways you believe these or other issues would or should affect NIH policies or processes.

Response to this RFI is voluntary.  Responders are free to address any or all of the above items.

Please note that the Government will not pay for response preparation or for the use of any information contained in the response.  All responses will be available, including name of the responder. In addition, NIH will prepare and make available a summary of all input received which is responsive to this RFI.

 

How to Submit a Response

 

All comments must be submitted electronically to  http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfi_files/nih_dbrw/add.cfm. Responses to this RFI will be accepted through February 24, 2012. You will see an electronic confirmation acknowledging receipt of your response, but will not receive individualized feedback on any suggestions.  No basis for claims against the U.S. Government shall arise as a result of a response to this request for information or from the Government's use of such information.

Inquiries

Specific questions about this RFI should be directed to the following e-mail address: ACDDiversity@mail.nih.gov

________________________________________

Weekly TOC for this Announcement

NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices

 

 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment