Policy 



No policy exists to define the current relationship between national research goals and the research partnership. 

 Instead, the relationship is defined by a mosaic of administrative and fiscal rules that specify the support mechanisms 

 of assistance and procurement without any guiding or overarching principles of research policy. As a result, the 

 relationship runs the risk of being defined administratively rather than programmatically. 



Perceived/Real Barriers 



While there are no major barriers to the NIH maintaining an effective relationship with University contractors, 

 for grants, current barriers to a more effective relationship include: 



• A perceived lack of coherent Government policies; 



• Different expectations regarding the primary purposes of universities (research and research training versus 

 a broader educational and intellectual milieu); 



• Perceived excessive and burdensome requirements, e.g., human subjects, animal welfare, biohazards, and 

 safety. NIH acknowledges its interest in simplifying the reporting and administrative burden, while main- 

 taining — or even strengthening, where needed — the issues of welfare and safety; 



• Conflict of interest; 



• Indirect cost issues; 



• A perception that the NIH is continuing "downward negotiations," a term applied to a process, no longer 

 practiced by most of the awarding components, of reducing post-award budgets; 



• Concern about handling of cases of reported misconduct; and 



• Failure by Government to pay full research costs, e.g., the expectation for supplementation of trainee 

 stipends, matching funds for construction, etc. 



Elements/Characteristics of a Productive Future Relationship: 



The primary goal of Federally-supported research should be to reflect the missions of the agencies involved. 

 Priority setting and future plans for Federally funded research should include both the attainment of specific research 

 goals as well as overall strengthening of the research base to increase the research capacity of the Nation. Means to 

 identify approaches to foster innovative, high risk research versus safe, less risky research are needed. 



The challenges that lie ahead for the Federal government's relationship with academia are considerable, in that 

 each expects the other to pay a greater component of costs for programs that are vital to both. The high costs of 

 equipment and laboratory renovation are particularly salient. One can anticipate a need for much greater scrutiny of 

 priorities and a decline in the practice of demanding new programs and initiatives without providing accompanying 

 funds to support them. 



With continued tight money, balancing the interests of supporting science versus scientists, and research-inten- 

 sive institutions versus other institutions, will present an increasing challenge. Balance must be found between fund- 

 ing of senior investigators and the support of new opportunities for young investigators. A balance must be found 

 between meeting these needs and those of individual research project grants. 



Future challenges will include the following: 



« Determining the Primary Goal of Federal (NIH) Research 



For NIH, research goals developed within the draft NIH Strategic Plan and the individual Institute and Cen- 

 ter Strategic Plans should be the driving force with regard to research funding. Funding mechanisms should 

 be used which best fit the attainment of these goals. NIH-based funding support will evolve as the mission 

 of NIH evolves. 



54 



