research

How one applies and has their proposal reviewed to gain a small share of the world's largest funding source for life science research is changing. The following highlights modifications affecting grant applications submitted to the National Institutes of Health for due dates on or after January 25, 2025, as posted on their Implementation of New Initiatives and Policies page.

As U.S. research institutions face funding uncertainty, countries and universities worldwide are launching initiatives to lure away our scientific talent:

As the federal R&D budget has grown, peer review committee compositions changed, and federal research awards have grown in size, the threshold to obtain the designation as a Carnegie R1 university of $50 million in total research spending to earn the designation was met by 42 additional universities for the first time, bringing the total to 187 nationwide.

In a recent State of the Science address, National Academy of Sciences President Marcia McNutt called attention to what she sees as an alarming trend: the federal contribution to basic research is stagnating while industry funding is rising. The federal share of U.S. spending on basic research, she said, was down from about 60% in 2011 to 40% in 2021.

Earlier this week, the White House announced a series of actions being undertaken by federal agencies to focus on women’s health.  Both NIH and ARPA-H announced new funding opportunities centered around women’s health, while the White House and other agencies took action without indicating any funding associated with that funding

The National Science Foundation recently announced awarding more than $100 million to 18 teams at academic institutions across the nation through the Accelerating Research Translation (ART) program. An NSF press release states, “NSF's investment will enable academic institutions to accelerate the pace and scale of translational research that will grow the nation's economy.”

The National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2024, signed in late December, ultimately contained fewer provisions related to research, technology, and entrepreneurship than the draft versions of the legislation initially proposed. Nonetheless, the final bill made some changes that could stabilize some of the department’s innovation activities in recent years and add some flexibility for companies and organizations engaging in technology transfer activities with defense institutions. Specifically, four sections worth noting in the FY 2024 NDAA are the following:

The Biden Administration issued an executive order earlier this week that provides guidance on the safe, secure, and trustworthy development and use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the U.S. The EO includes guidance for agencies to work to provide new opportunities for small businesses and entrepreneurs in AI and other directives.

The economies, the wellbeing, and the stories of the U.S. and China have become so intertwined and so interdependent that individuals not following global political-military-ideological studies might be excused for getting lost in the narrative, let alone following such a complex plot. There won’t be a simplifying explanation offered here, but there are a few new twists in the storyline SSTI wanted to share that may relate to the innovation investment, product development, and exit strategies for some parties within the TBED community. 

In 1862, during the Civil War, Congress passed the Land-Grant Agricultural and Mechanical College Act of 1862 (a.k.a. the Morrill Act of 1862). This legislation extended educational opportunities for many White working-class Americans. But it did little to extend education to Black people. The Morrill Act of 1890 passed 28 years later created new land grant institutions to address the issue of Black peoples’ access to higher education. But racial inequities between the two land-grant systems have persisted into the present day.