NINDS Advisory Council Meeting Minutes, February 15-16, 2007
Skip secondary menu
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH
NATIONAL ADVISORY NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE COUNCIL
Summary of Meeting1
February 15-16, 2007
The National Advisory Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NANDS) Council was convened for its 168th meeting on February 15-16,
2007, at Building 31, Conference Room 10, Bethesda, Maryland. Dr. Story Landis, Director of the National Institute of Neurological
Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), served as Chairperson.
In accordance with Public Law 92-463, the meeting was:
Open: February 15, 2007 - 10:30 a.m. to 5:05 p.m.
for the review and discussion of program development, needs, and policy; and
Closed: February 15, 2007 - 5:05 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
February 16, 2007 - 8:05 a.m. to 10:10 a.m.
for the review of the Board of Scientific Counselors’ Reports and for the consideration of individual grant applications.
Council members present were:
Ms. Susan Axelrod
Ms. Prisca Chen Marvin
Mr. Robi Blumenstein
Dr. Helen Mayberg
Dr. Lucie Bruijn
Dr. Laura Ment
Dr. Alicia Conill (via telephone)
Dr. William Mobley
Dr. Ralph Dacey, Jr.
Dr. Caroline Tanner
Dr. Francisco Gonzalez-Scarano
Dr. David Van Essen
Dr. Edgar Kenton
Dr. Gary Westbrook (via telephone)
Dr. John Loeser
Dr. Huda Zoghbi (2/15/07 only)
Council members absent were:
Dr. Raymond Dingledine
Mr. Robert Waterman
Council Roster (Attachment 1)
Ex Officio Members present:
Dr. Robert Ruff, Department of Veterans Affairs
Dr. Geoffrey Ling, Department of Defense
1 For the record, it is noted that members absent themselves from the meeting when the Council is discussing applications (a)
from their respective institutions or (b) in which a real or apparent conflict of interest might occur.
Members of the public present for portions of the open meeting included:
Deborah Dietz, Social and Scientific Systems
Michelle Rodrigues, SRI International
Dr. Elizabeth Hoffman, American Psychological Association
NINDS employees present for portions of the meeting include:
|
Dr. Alan Willard |
Ms. Margaret Jacobs |
Other Federal employees present for portions of the meeting included:
Linda Rodman, OD
Dr. Stefano Bertuzzi, OD
Kate Whelan, NIMH
Debra Dabney, NIMH
Dr. Boris Sokolov, CSR
Dr. David Simpson, CSR
I. Call to Order and Opening Remarks
Dr. Story Landis, Director, NINDS, welcomed everyone to the 168th meeting of the NINDS Advisory Council. NINDS periodically invites, as guests of the Council, the chairpersons of review committees and study sections as part of the Institute’s continuing effort to strengthen the liaison between initial review groups and the Council. Dr. Landis introduced Dr. Costantino Iadecola, who is Chair of the NINDS NSD-A Review Committee. Dr. Iadecola is Professor of Neurology and Neuroscience Chief, Division of Neurobiology, Weill Medical College of Cornell University.
She also introduced Dr. Fred Lublin, Saunders Family Professor of Neurology, Corinne Goldsmith Dickinson Center for Multiple Sclerosis, Mount Sinai Medical Center. Dr. Lublin gave a presentation at the Clinical Trials Subcommittee meeting that morning. Two Council members are unable to attend: Dr. Raymond Dingledine and Mr. Robert Waterman.
There have been three major new NINDS staff appointments: the new Scientific Director, Dr. Alan Koretsky, who was unable to attend and will be introduced at the next Council meeting; the new Deputy Director, Dr. Walter Koroshetz, an internationally-recognized neurologist, investigator, and administrator. He was vice chair of the neurology service, Director of stroke and neurointensive care services at Massachusetts General Hospital and professor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Landis also announced that the position of Associate Director for Management and Executive Officer has been filled by Ms. Joellen Harper Austin. She has previously served as Chief of the Grants Management Branch, Deputy Executive Officer, and Acting Executive Officer.
Remarks by Deputy Director Dr. Walter Koroshetz--Dr. Koroshetz described his new position as NINDS Deputy Director as an opportunity to integrate his interests in basic neuroscience and clinical research. He stated that a high priority for him will be promoting research that leads to better treatment for patients. He also looks forward to learning more about the broad range of neuroscience research. He has been impressed with the level of dedication and productivity of the NINDS staff He has had considerable experience working with lay organizations and looks forward to expanding that role. He hopes to assist in the Institute’s decision-making process to optimize the effects of its resources. Dr. Koroshetz stated he looks forward to providing informed counsel to the Director and others; helping to integrate the clinical and basic science programs; energizing therapeutic development, including in the Intramural program; and fostering young investigators.
II. Report of the Associate Director for Extramural Research, NINDS
Dr. Robert Finkelstein, Associate Director for Extramural Research, NINDS, informed the Council that they would be in open session until late afternoon. after which they will go into closed session to hear the Board of Scientific Counselors’ report from the Division of Intramural Research. The public and extramural staff must leave at that time. Tomorrow’s session, where individual grants are discussed, is closed to the public as well.
Consideration of Minutes of Previous Council Meeting
The minutes of the Council meeting of September 14-15, 2006, were considered and accepted as written.
Confirmation of Dates for Future Council Meetings
May 24-25, 2007 (Thursday and Friday)
September 20-21, 2007 (Thursday and Friday)
February 7-8, 2008 (Thursday and Friday)
May 29-30, 2008 (Thursday and Friday)
September 18-19, 2008 (Thursday and Friday)
New Dates
February 5-6, 2009 (Thursday and Friday)
May 28-29, 2009 (Thursday and Friday)
September 17-18, 2009 (Thursday and Friday)
Expedited Review Process--A subset of Council members approve applications within the payline that have no unresolved questions prior to the Council meeting. Robi Blumenstein, David Van Essen, and Laura Ment are serving in this capacity for FY 2007. This round, 143 applications were eligible to be expedited, and 39 have already been issued.
Introduction of new DER Staff--Dr. Finkelstein introduced the following new staff: Dr. Manfred Schubert, Program Director, Technology Development Cluster; Dr. Tracy Chen, program analyst, Anticonvulsant Screening Program, Technology Development Cluster; Lisa Joliet, Chief, Administrative Services Branch; and Dr. William Benzing, Scientific Review Administrator, NSD-C review committee, Scientific Review Branch.
Council Operating Procedures--Once a year, Council is required to endorse the Council Operating Procedures, which includes the Council Delegated Authorities. Council moved to approve the Operating Procedures.
III. Report of the Director, NINDS
Budget--The House of Representatives passed a continuing resolution maintaining most FY 07 budgets at FY 2006 levels; however, NIH has received a 2 percent increase over FY 2006, which amounts to $620 million. The increased amount is allocated to the budget of the NIH Office of the Director. Four hundred eighty ($480) million is specifically designated for the Common Fund. This includes Roadmap projects, $40 million for “Junior Pioneer Awards,” $91 million for new investigators, $69 million for the National Children’s Study, and smaller sums for other targeted programs. The expectation is that NIH will fund 500 new grants and 1500 new principal investigators (PIs) in FY 07. In addition to increasing the number of funded new PIs, another NIH priority is the “vulnerable investigator;” investigators with their first R01 and established investigators with only one R01.
NIH Reform Act--The NIH reauthorization was passed in December 2006 and signed into law. It establishes the Division of Program Coordination, Planning, and Strategic Initiatives (DPCPSI), a major new office in the Office of the Director at NIH, responsible for program coordination planning and strategic initiatives. The new office will manage the Common Fund, which will ultimately reach 5 percent of the total NIH budget. The legislation requires a review of the project selection and effectiveness of the Common Fund. A Council of Councils is required to advise the Director on the best uses of the Common Fund. NINDS has nominated members to the Council of Councils. The legislation also establishes a Scientific Management and Review Board, which is charged with reviewing the structure of NIH every seven years. It authorizes but does not appropriate a 7 percent increase in the NIH budget for the next three years. It requires a public process for reorganizing NIH programs, and it requires a streamlining of reports submitted to Congress. A series of working groups has been created to interpret many of the mandates in the legislation.
Roadmap 1.5--NIH issued a Request for Information (RFI) to the research community soliciting new Roadmap projects. Three hundred new proposals came in, and five working groups have been created to select the proposals that will go forward. Coordinating groups have been formed to look broadly across NIH at what the different Institutes and Centers (ICs) are doing and to make recommendations for efficiencies, changes in implementation, or expansion of programs.
NIH Blueprint--Initiated in 2004, the NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research is designed to enhance collaboration among the NIH Office of the Director and 15 NIH ICs that support research on the nervous system. NINDS and NIMH are the lead institutes. Dr. Robert Baughman is the co-chair of the Blueprint Coordinating Committee; Dr. Landis and Dr. Insel co-chair the Directors Committee, and Dr. Rebecca Farkas coordinates the Blueprint activities. After focusing on tools and training, the group decided to use research themes to drive initiatives. The theme for FY 07 is neurodegeneration, FY 08 is development, and FY 09 is plasticity. A workshop was held on neurodegeneration, which resulted in the development of initiatives for Blueprint. For the area of “development” for FY 08, it was decided that it would be useful to have a workshop on human embryonic stem cells in the nervous system; the state of the art, how neurons can be developed, etc. Initiatives may result from the workshop.
Included in the NIH Reform Bill is a requirement to report on how much Institutes spend on trans-NIH programs.
IV. Discussion of FY 07 Budget Strategies
The NIH mandate to help new PIs was discussed extensively by Council. Several suggestions for meeting NINDS’s goal of funding 128 new investigators in FY 07 were made by Council members. The Institute is also looking at applications with a secondary assignment to NINDS. Dr. Zoghbi recommended encouraging K02 applicants to consider submitting an R01 instead. There was support for going up to the 25 percentile and/or to 170 priority score and for going back to the May 06 Council round and forward to the October 07 Council. Another suggestion was to look for applications that scored between 9 and 25 and had a new investigator co-PI.
V. Updates on NIH Reauthorization Bill and NINDS Planning Process
Dr. Paul Scott, Director, Office of Science Policy and Planning, NINDS, presented an update on the Institute-wide strategic planning effort. The Institute has formed a steering committee of current and former NANDS members and NINDS staff. Current NANDS members are Robi Blumenstein, Lucie Bruijn, and Laura Ment. As described at the September Council meeting, the planning effort will be organized according to four themes, or modules. Recently, Dr. Landis proposed a “Blue Sky” component that will precede the modules and provide broad, visionary goals to which NINDS should aspire over the next quarter century. Through a broadly targeted RFI and a series of internal and external meetings, the NINDS will explore where basic and clinical neuroscience should be in 25 years and how the NINDS can best contribute to the broader neuroscience research enterprise.
The Council expressed general support for the Blue Sky concept. There was some discussion about the challenges of thinking ahead 25 years. While it is important to plan for the long-term, it is equally important to maintain flexibility so that NINDS is not caught off guard if the future does not evolve as expected. The NINDS should also make an effort to include more junior scientists in these discussions, since they will be at the peak of their careers in 25 years and thus have the most at stake. Suggestions from Council included: formulating concrete goals, making the most of advances in genome studies, learning from past decisions, and continued investments in technology. The Council also reminded NINDS to keep the Institute’s mission front and center of any planning discussion.
VI. Council Subcommittee Reports
Training, Career Development, and Special Programs Subcommittee—Dr. Huda Zoghbi
Dr. Zoghbi reported that Dr. Stephen Korn provided an overview of the award statistics during the current round of funding (January 2007) whereby 2 K02, 2 K08, and 4 K99 awards were granted. The major difference is that 2 K08s were awarded in this round compared to 6 in the past round (18 percent versus 32 percent). The current number of funded K23 awards is 6, F31 is 23, F30 is 6, and F32 is 14 (postdoctoral fellowships). A disturbing fact is the fraction of funded F30 (MD/PhD) fellowships for FY2007 (19 percent) as compared to FY2006 (32 percent). The committee discussed the repercussions of such a low funding rate for a highly qualified and selected group of applicants. Such statistics imply that highly qualified candidates are not being funded and send a negative message to candidates who we should strive to keep excited about research careers. A big issue contributing to this low funding rate is that a large number of applicants apply, but only a few institutes fund F30s.
The committee suggested that data be prepared to show the increasing number of such quality applicants and the need for the NIH leadership to redistribute educational funds based on institutes that actually get the highest proportion of such qualified applicants. Lastly, in keeping with the directive from the Office of Director regarding the importance of supporting independent investigators, it is important to keep in mind that qualified MD/PhD students are the lifeline for a successful disease-oriented research by independent investigators.
In summary, the committee recommends a careful review of the funding provided by all institutes for F30s and that NIH evaluate the applicant pool/institute and subsequently consider allocating common funds based on the data.
The committee also discussed how to measure success of the K award program. To date, the hypothesis has been that K awards, especially K08 and K23s, attract, prepare and keep neurologists in science to do disease-oriented research. Moreover, without K awards, the ability of clinicians to enter and succeed in research would be extremely limited.
Two ways to test this hypothesis were discussed. First, we need to identify what happened to K awardees. How many ended up in academic faculty positions, how many received R01s, what are their publication records? However, it was also discussed that there were many ways for a K awardee to succeed that may not be measurable in standard NIH ways. For example, have they moved to industry, do they participate in research without obtaining PI status. [The point was also made that having the research experience would benefit the physician’s clinical practice even if the K award was the terminal research experience. However, this value could not be measured.] Moreover, how long must the K awardee remain in research to be considered a successful awardee?
Second, one can examine converse measurements. For example, it was suggested that one could pick several of the top academic neurology programs in the country and ask how many of the faculty had K awards. The hypothesis that a K award is necessary to succeed in academic research suggests that the majority of young academic faculty should have had K awards. The point was made that more senior faculty would not fit within this hypothesis, due to historical reasons, so it will be important to determine how to measure this. One might also ask what percentage of recently tenured faculty had K awards, and whether other criteria (e.g. Head of residency) were alternatives or required.
The committee recommended that a small subcommittee discuss these issues via conference call to develop with measures of success and to develop a useful and reliable survey to gather the data. A committee composed of Drs. Korn, Koroshetz, Zoghbi and Gonzalez-Scarano was formed and charged with this task.
Basic and Preclinical Programs Subcommittee--Dr. David Van Essen
Van Essen reported on the following topics:
Policy regarding P01 Program Project Grant Competing Renewals--Program Project grants (P01 or PPG), often with many competing renewals, are a significant component of the NINDS investigator-initiated research effort. For NINDS, P01s are a relatively large proportion of the budget compared with other Institutes. In recent years, some other Institutes (e.g. NIDCD, NIMH, and NEI) have eliminated or introduced sun setting of P01s.
Subcommittee members discussed the issue of implementing a five or ten year time limit on P01 grants. While there were spectrums of opinions on the topic, several members of the group reaffirmed the value of having the P01 mechanism with time limiting options. It was thought that the greatest benefit of such collaborative interactions would come from a thorough reevaluation of the grant; which would occur, allowing only new applications every five years. Reevaluations would also be feasible with ten year awards. It was pointed out that for some projects a ten year time frame is more realistic to allow completion of a project. There were recommendations, from some committee members, to establish a high barrier for competing renewals in the ten year version.
The consensus of the subcommittee members was that an effective use of the P01 mechanism would be to restrict grants to a ten year time period which would allow for one competing renewal. As some committee members expressed concern regarding the quality of subprojects in P01 applications, it was also recommended that the scientific review groups be given strict guidance regarding the review of competing awards, to ensure that all subprojects are held to an equally high standard.
Some committee members also suggested that the newly implemented Multiple Principal Investigators R01 may fulfill some of the collaborative needs of P01 applicants; therefore, limiting the demand for the P01 mechanism.
Policy regarding new and competing applications for P30 Center Core grants--The NINDS Center Core Grants (P30) program was implemented in 2002 and was reissued in 2005. The current Program Announcement (PAR05-070) is active until February 2, 2008. Because of the tight budget situation, in August 2006, NINDS announced the cancellation of two P30 receipt dates, including the October 2006 and January 2007 receipts. The May 2007 receipt date is the first for renewal applications in the program.
Subcommittee members discussed whether or not the NINDS should once again accept P30 applications. The importance of providing shared resources in a period of difficult funding and reduced departmental support was emphasized. Some members of the group expressed strong support for the mechanism and its ability to assist in sustaining faculty while providing access to facilities that would otherwise not be available to junior and mid-career investigators. The cost effectiveness and quality control of not having to train researchers on R01s for specialized techniques that are used rarely or intermittently was emphasized. On the other hand, members of the group commented that the program also allowed for specialized training by a centralized team of highly skilled investigators when this is appropriate.
While most subcommittee members felt that the program encouraged interactions among investigators, some members expressed concern regarding the selection of project teams and the proper identification of user groups for P30 projects. In response to these concerns, the Chief of the NINDS Scientific Review Branch assured the group that team synergy and the presence of a strong user group were key components of the review criteria.
Overall, the subcommittee expressed high enthusiasm for reinstating the P30 program.
Clinical Trials Subcommittee--Dr. Laura Ment
Dr. Ment reported that the open session began with a brief report by Dr. Marler to the committee regarding recent activities of the Clinical Trial group. He reported that NINDS is now seeing a greater balance of funded phase III trials across different neurological disorders. Recruitment in our phase III trials continues to be a major challenge, and the Institute has been aggressive in resolving the problems. In order to ensure that our phase III trials maintain a budget through these difficulties to complete the trial, the NINDS Clinical Trials group continues to work with the investigators to restrict spending of the budget proportionate to the accrual of subjects in the trial. Dr. Marler also reported that the Clinical Research Consortium (CRC) and the Emergency Neurology Network (NETT) are both fully funded and have begun as planned. The CRC is working with several NINDS funded studies to incorporate them into the consortium. The NETT is expected to start their first trial by the middle of this year. Lastly, Dr. Marler indicated that NINDS is expecting several PIs of phase III trials to submit applications for continuations in the next year.
The Subcommittee next heard a presentation from Janice Cordell and Dr. Fred Lublin about a recently completed NINDS hands on workshop on Clinical Trials for Principal Investigators and Coordinators. The purpose of this workshop was to bring together clinical trial PIs and study coordinators with NINDS staff, to develop successful approaches to the conduct of clinical trials. Dr. Lublin discussed a number of suggestions from the workshop in three areas of discussion: Administrative Issues to Consider for Clinical Trials; Recruitment; and Strategies for Research in the HIPAA Environment and other Regulatory Issues. The report has been written and will be made public.
The Subcommittee also heard a report from Dr. Gutmann about a recently completed NINDS workshop on the Clinical Research Awareness in Residency. The goal of this workshop was to discuss the need and potential strategies to increase involvement of residents in clinical research. Overall the program was very well received with interest in making this a continued dialogue. A report is being written and will be made public.
The open session to the Subcommittee meeting ended with a presentation from Dr. Yee, who presented the Biennial Report on NINDS Activities to Include Women and Minorities in Clinical Research. Clinical research funded by NIH is required to include women and minorities in appropriate numbers based on scientific question being studied and investigators are required to submit demographic information on study participants in annual progress reports. A comprehensive report is prepared for Congress every two years, which Advisory Councils review to ensure that Institutes are in compliance with inclusion requirements. The reports revealed that 50 percent of the participants included were female and 47 percent were reported as male. Overall minorities represented approximately 24 percent of the total enrollment. It was noted (in the report) that NINDS minority enrollment of Hispanic and African American increased in this last report
The Council voted to approve the Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical Research Report.
VII. Concept Clearance for the FY 2008 NIH Neuroscience Blueprint Neurodevelopment Initiative Concepts
Dr. Robert Riddle, Program Director, Neurogenetics Cluster, introduced the five initiative concepts that resulted from the Blueprint planning workshop, “Developing Tools and Resources for Neurodevelopment:” 1) Monoclonal Antibody Resources for Neural Development, 2) Genetic Tools for Development in the Non-Human Primate, 3) Novel Techniques for Spatiotemporal Mapping of Neural Circuit Formation, 4) Cross-Species Standardization of Assays to Developmental Behaviors, and 5) Developmental Gene Expression Project.
Council voted to approve concept clearance for the five initiatives.
VIII. Overview, Division of Intramural Research
Dr. Landis explained that Dr. Alan Koretsky was named Scientific Director on October 1; however, due to a long-standing commitment, he is unable to attend this Council meeting. The Intramural program has approximately 55 investigators. The programs range from basic science to clinical trials. When Dr. Landis became the Scientific Director in 1995, her principal goal was to improve the quality of the Intramural program through rigorous review, recruitment, and re-allocation of resources. The structure was changed to make the overall research program more effective. Another of her major efforts was to contribute to the creation of a broad, Intramural science community. Since coming on board, Dr. Koretsky has expressed interest in reviewing the current, flat structure and organizing labs and branches around programs that would contain a mix of independent investigators. The range of research from basic to clinical would be conducted in the program areas. To begin the reorganization process, Dr. Koretsky created four groups: 1) Neurodegeneration, 2) Systems Neuroscience, 3) Development, and 4) Channels. As an incentive to encouraging researchers to come together into program areas where their research intersects, Dr. Koretsky is considering a type of center grant for Intramural investigators. His goal is to present a plan for reorganization and future direction to a Blue Ribbon Panel. Another of his goals is to encourage the development of the translational and clinical programs. Dr. Koroshetz will serve as a resource in this objective. Another initiative taking place in Intramural is in the area of Parkinson’s disease. Ten to fifteen investigators within five institutes are involved in some area of Parkinson’s disease research.
IX. Scientific Presentation: “Translational Studies of the Hereditary Spastic Paraplegias”
Dr. Craig Blackstone, Chief of the Cellular Neurology Unit, Clinical Neurosciences Program, in the Intramural Research Program of the NINDS, presented a 30 minute talk on his research into the cellular mechanisms underlying the hereditary spastic paraplegias. This group of disorders affects upper motor neurons in a length-dependent fashion, and over 30 genetic loci have been identified. Many of the known proteins affect processes that could be considered “length-sensitive,” such as membrane trafficking and signaling. A better understanding of these disease proteins and their functions promises to increase not only our understanding of the mechanisms underlying these disorders, but also of basic neuronal mechanisms of transport and development.
Dr. Blackstone focused his presentation on one particular form of hereditary spastic paraplegia known as Troyer syndrome, which afflicts Old Order Amish communities in Ohio. He described how his laboratory has completed clinical studies of patients with this disorder and used these insights to generate animal models that replicate important features of the disorder. In addition, his laboratory has made great strides in understanding the functions of the previously unknown protein, spartin, which is mutated in this syndrome. In particular, he described his studies showing that this protein is involved in a critical aspect of membrane trafficking and protein degradation during endocytosis, an intracellular process very important for the proper functioning of neurons. He concluded his presentation by describing how this protein and many other hereditary spastic paraplegia proteins are involved in common cellular pathways that may ultimately provide new targets for therapy.
X. Review of the Division of Intramural Research Board of Scientific Counselors’ Reports
In closed session, Dr. Landis presented the findings and recommendations of the Board of Scientific Counselors based on their review of specific DIR laboratories/units during 2006. The Council discussed the reports of the Board and accepted them.
XI. Council Consideration of Pending Applications
This portion of the meeting, involving specific grant review, was closed to the public. The Council gave special attention to applications from foreign institutions and other applications, which needed specific discussion. Prior to the discussion of the grants, Dr. Finkelstein reminded Council regarding conflict of interest and confidentiality as follows:
Conflict of Interest
The regulations concerning conflict of interest were reviewed. Council members were reminded that materials furnished for review purposes and discussion during the closed portions of the meeting are considered privileged information. All Council members present signed a statement certifying that they had not been involved in any conflict of interest situations during the review of grant applications.
Confidentiality
During the closed session, any information that is discussed and the outcome of any recommendation are considered privileged information. They may not be discussed outside of the closed session. If an applicant requests support for his or her application from a Council member, the Council member must respond that he/she is not permitted to discuss the application. Any inquiry should be referred to Dr. Robert Finkelstein as the Council Executive Secretary, who will then refer the questions to the appropriate staff member for response.
Research Training and Career Development Programs
The Council reviewed a total of 169 research career development and institutional training grant applications; of this total, 110 applications had primary assignment to NINDS, and 77 of them (70.0 percent) were recommended for support in the amount of $12.9 million first-year direct costs. It is anticipated that, of the research career development and institutional training grant applications competing at this Council, NINDS will be able to pay first-year direct costs of approximately $1.9 million.
Research Grant Awards
The Council reviewed a total of 2,317 research grant applications; of this total, 1,378 applications had primary assignment to NINDS, and 769 of them (55.8 percent) were recommended for support in the amount of $226.2 million first-year direct costs. It is anticipated that, of the research grants competing at this Council, NINDS will be able to pay first-year direct costs of approximately $48.5 million.
Senator Jacob Javits Neuroscience Investigator Awards
The Senator Jacob Javits Neuroscience Investigator Awards are made to distinguished investigators who have a record of scientific excellence and productivity, who are actively pursuing an area of research of strategic importance, and who can be expected to continue to be highly productive for a seven-year period. Candidates are nominated and selected at each Council meeting. At this meeting, the Council recommended three investigators as Javits awardees.
Small Business Innovation Research and Small Technology Transfer Award Programs
The Council reviewed a total of 152 Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Technology Transfer Award (STTR) grant applications; of this total, 85 applications had primary assignment to NINDS and 50 of them (58.8 percent) were recommended for support in the amount of $12.5 million first-year direct costs. It is anticipated that, of the SBIR and STTR applications competing at this Council, NINDS will be able to pay first-year direct costs of approximately $5.8 million.
XII. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 10:10 a.m. on Friday, February 16.
We certify that, to the best of our knowledge, the foregoing minutes and attachments are accurate and complete.
Robert Finkelstein, Ph.D.
Executive Secretary
National Advisory Neurological Disorders and Stroke Council
Director, Division of Extramural Research
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
Story C. Landis, Ph.D.
Chairperson
National Advisory Neurological Disorders and Stroke Council
Director
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
These minutes will be formally considered by the Council at its next meeting. Corrections or notations will be incorporated
in the minutes of that meeting.
Last updated August 29, 2007
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
Home | About NINDS | Disorders A - Z | Research Funding | News From NINDS | Find People | Training | Research
Careers@NINDS | FOIA (NIH) | Accessibility Policy | Contact Us | Privacy Statement
