Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 11
I. ORIGINS AND ORGANIZATION OF ~ STUDY
The present report presents the findings and recommendations of
the Committee on a Study of National Needs for Biomedical and Behavioral
Research Personnel, as the first of the annual reports in a continuing
study called for in the National Research Act of 1974 (PL 93-348~.
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS 4
Approved on July 12, 1974, the Act amends the Public Health Service
Act "to establish a program of National Research Service Awards to assure
the continued excellence [emphasis added] of biomedical and behavioral
research." Title I is called the National Research Service Award Act
and will be referred to in this report as the Act. It repeals existing
research training and fellowship authorities of the National Institutes
of Health (NIH) and the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Admini-
stration (ADAMHA). ~ ~ ~ ~
Research training activities of these agencies will
henceforth be carried out under a consolidated authority contained in
the new law. The Act concerns research training primarily, although
clinical training is also addressed. It is not completely clear how
the Act affects authority available elsewhere in the Public Health Ser-
vice Act under which the Secretary may enter into contracts with public
and private entities and individuals for health services resesarch and
health statistics training.
The Act is a clear signal of Congressional concern regarding an
important sector of the nation's human resources. The Committee regards
its enactment as a positive step in which the Congress calls on the re-
sponsible agencies of the Executive Branch, its own committees, and the
biomedical and behavioral research communities to examine national per-
sonnel requirements in an area that has contributed much to the national
well-being in the past and that has much to offer in the future.
resee Appendix C for further information about legislative authorities
for training, including portions of the text of Title I of the Act.
11
OCR for page 12
The Act authorizes awards for predoctoral and postdoctoral research
training both to individuals and to nonfederal public or nonprofit
institutions (which will select individuals for such awards). Not less
than 25 percent of the amount appropriated must be made available
directly to individuals. Each award recipient must give assurance that
he or she will meet a service requirement engage in health research or
teaching or, alternatively, (1) serve as a member of the National Health
Service Corps, (2) serve in his or her specialty in a geographic shortage
area in that specialty or in a health maintenance organization which
offers care in a medically underserved area, or (3) serve in an approved
health-related activity. Guidelines now under review specify the period
of time within which repayment may be made, the type of research and
teaching which qualify as payback, and other matters relating to service
payback. Recipients who fail to comply with the service requirement
must repay the amount of their awards plus interest, less proportionate
credit for half of the months they actually served.
Effective July 1, 1975, awards under the Act may be made for research
training only in those subject areas in which there is need for personnel,
as determined by a continuing study which the Secretary is to request
the National Academy of Sciences to conduct. The Act states that the
purposes of the study are to:
1) establish (A) the Nation's overall need for biomedical
and behavioral research personnel, (B) the subject areas in
which such personnel are needed and the number of such
personnel needed in each such area, and (C) the kinds and
extent of training which should be provided such personnel;
2) assess (A) current training programs available for the
training of biomedical and behavioral research personnel
which are conducted under this Act at or through institutes
under the National Institutes of Health and the Alcohol,
Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration, and (B) other
current training programs available for the training of
such personnel; 3) identify the kinds of research positions
available to and held by individuals completing such
programs; 4) determine, to the extent feasible, whether
the programs referred to in clause (B) of paragraph (2)
would be adequate to meet the needs established under
paragraph (1) if the programs referred to in clause (A)
of paragraph (2) were terminated; and 5) determine what
modifications in the programs referred to in paragraph (2)
are required to meet the needs established under paragraph
(1) .
12
OCR for page 13
FEASIBILITY STUDY
Pursuant to this requirement, the Secretary requested the Academy
on September 16, 1974, to conduct the study. The NIH was designated
the lead agency within the federal government, but it was understood
that the study would also require assistance from ADAMHA. Since the
National Research Council is the operating arm of the Academy, the
Chairman of the National Research Council (NRC) asked the Commission on
Human Resources to take a central responsibility within NRC, with the
understanding that other NRC units" especially the Assembly of Behavioral
and Social Sciences, the Assembly of Life Science.s, and the Institute of
Medicine - would also participate.
On September 21, 1974, the Governing Board approved the establish-
ment of a committee by the Commission on Human Resources to examine the
feasibility of the continuing study called for in the Act. Funds were
provided by the NIH to carry out the feasibility study. NIH, ADAMHA,
and HRA also provided data and other information upon request and con-
sulted with the Committee about the requirements for the continuing
study.
-The committee on a Feasibility Study of National Needs for Biomed-
ical and Behavioral Research Personnel met three times under a very tight
schedule to complete its task as early in 1975 as-possible. Five panels
in disciplinary areas (Basic Medical Sciences, Basic and Applied Biology,
Behavioral Sciences, Clinical Sciences, and Health Services Research and
Evaluation) and three panels in methodological areas (Supporting Studies,
Data and Analyses, and Impacts of Training) assisted the committee in
reviewing the adequacy of data and methodology for estimating national
personnel needs in the biomedical and behavioral research fields and in
considering some possible approaches to the tasks set by the Congress.
The chairmen of the Commission and~committee and members of the
staff consulted widely concerning ways of responding to the Congress-
ional mandate. Within the NRC in addition to the Commission itself-
the following units were kept informed and invited to contribute:
Assembly of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Assembly of Life Sciences,
and Institute of Medicine. The chairmen of related-sections of the
National Academy of Sciences were invited to express their views. Out-
side the Academies-Institute-Council complex, a number of groups were
consulted: the staff of related Congressional committees, NIH/ADAMHA/
HRA, the Office of Management and Budget, the Office of the Assistant
Secretary/HEW-Health, and a number of scientific and professional
societies and educational organizations.
13
OCR for page 14
The committee's report on feasibility was completed early in Febru-
ary and submitted to the NRC Governing Board on February 21, 1975.5 It
recommended that the National Academy of Sciences, operating through the
NRC's Commission on Human Resources, accept the Secretary's invitation
to conduct the continuing study, but stated a number of conditions and
caveats. The committee viewed the task as difficult, but necessary and
in a suitably long time frame feasible. The report discussed the
reasons for this belief, but necessarily left a number of important
questions to be answered in the continuing study. In response, the
Governing Board approved the first phase of the continuing study to
June 30, 1975. The Chairman of the National Research Council replied
to this effect to the Secretary on March 6, 1975, transmitting a copy
of the committee's report.
SCOPE OF To FIAT SPORT
The legislative date for the annual submission of a report to the
Congress by the Academy through the Secretary was March 31. It was
agreed, however, that the first report could not be provided before
June l, 1975, because of the need to make preparations for the task
ahead. The feasibility report made it clear that this task would indeed
be complex and difficult:
Assaying quality [of personnel] is a difficult problem.
There are at present only rough methods for taking this
attribute into account, such as assuming that the quality
of-institutions or departments Danube measured, and that
on the whole institutional quality is related to the quality
of those who are awarded degrees.
The results of attempts to produce supply and demand
forecasts by field and discipline have been spotty. Sizeable
differences between projected estimates and actuality are
not uncommon...
One of the central problems of projections is the
difficulty of formulating generally acceptable concepts
of underemployment.
3 National Research Council, Report
Study on National Needs for Biomedical and Behavioral Research Personnel,
.
Commission on Human Resources, 1975.
Committee on a Feasibility
14
OCR for page 15
In addition to methodologic complexity and data
shortcomings that plague the projector, there is the
well-known fact that published projections are viewed
as predictions by the public and the market moves to
defeat the predictions.
Employers and prospective em-
Ployees note where "shortages" or "overages" are fore-
cast and shape their strategies accordingly.
~ _
In spite of these problems ahead, the committee on the feasibility
study thought that a beginning could be made. Its first recommendation
was:
The committee recommends that the National Academy of
Sciences accept the invitation of the Secretary to con-
duct the continuing study mandated by Title I of the
National Research Act. The recommendation is based on
the belief: (1) that within the methodologic limitations
, , _
outlined in this report a productive start can be made
during the current fiscal year toward meeting the re-
quirements specified in the law; (2) that improvements
can be expected in ability to gather and utilize needed
information as experience is gained over the next several
years; and (3) that the National Research Council through
the experience of its Commission on Human Resources and
its ability to call upon the skills of the scientific
community is the most appropriate agency to conduct the
continuing study. The recommendation further assumes
that sufficient agreement can be reached on the conditions
for the study as outlined below.
The feasibility report went on to describe these conditions, some
of which could be readily established, others of which (improvement of
the data base, development of more sophisticated methodologies) would be
realizable only in a period of several years. The 1975 report, it was
clear, to be prepared within a period of about 90 days, could not be
more than a preliminary response to the Congressional request- the
result- of an effort to bring readily available data and professional
judgment to bear on the study requirements. The committee for the
feasibility report looked to the reports of 1976 and beyond to provide
the basis on which the efficacy of the continuing study should be judged.
15
OCR for page 16
A concurrent development of great significance to the task ahead
was the Presidential appointment late in 1974 of the Panel on Biomedical
Research, chaired by Franklin Murphy. It is the Panel's task to assess
the federal programs for the support of biomedical research, identify
areas of future research need, and - around the end of FY 1976- submit
recommendations for federal funding. The committee for the feasibility
study pointed out that personnel requirements and federal research
support in these fields were very closely related to each other.
Several studies had shown that the numbers of research doctorates
awarded- suitably lagged to allow for the training period - were sub-
stantially determined in a correlational sense by federal R and D
funds in the biomedical fields. The federal government, through its
system of research grants and contracts and training programs, is the
major supporter of biomedical research personnel and - to a lesser
extent -behavioral research personnel. Federal decisions to increase
or decrease research funds exercise a compelling influence on the labor
market in these fields. It would clearly be necessary for the con-
tinuing study of personnel to be kept apprised of the development of
the Panel's study and to follow trends in R and D support.
THE COMMITTEE
Appointed by the Chairman of the Commission on Human Resources
with the approval of the Chairman of the National Research Council,
the Committee on a Study of National Needs for Biomedical and Behavioral
Research Personnel (Appendix A) has the overall supervisory responsi-
bility for the study and for the annual reports issuing from it. The
Committee is a multidisciplinary group, bringing experience from the
biomedical and behavioral research communities, academia and industry,
different institutional types, and various areas of expertise in
studies. Two thirds of the members also served as members of the
Committee for the feasibility study. Although the Committee is
associated with a Commission within the NRC structure and submits
its reports in accord with NRC report-review procedures, the contents,
findings, and recommendations of the annual reports are those of the
Committee alone. The Committee has held four meetings in the period
February 28 to June 1, 1975.
16
OCR for page 17
THE PANELS
To assist the Committee with its tasks in various
ization, five Panels have been appointed (Appendix B). ___ a_
in disciplinary areas related to national ~ ~'~ ~
training: Basic Biomedical Sciences, Behavioral Sciences, Clinical
Sciences, and Health Services Research. One of them -Data and Studies -
is concerned with the methodology and information sources to be used.
About 60 percent of the Panel members took part in the feasibility
study. The findings and recommendations of the Panels are transmitted
to the Committee for its consideration in arriving at its own judgments.
Queries and suggestions from the Committee provide many of the Panel
agenda, but the Panels have the prerogative of initiating inquiries on
their own. The Panel on Data and Studies has held two meetings in the
period February 28 to June 1, 1975, and the Panel on Basic Biomedical
Sciences and the Panel on Behavioral Sciences have met once in that
period. Members of the Panels in disciplinary areas have submitted
individual estimates of the needs for personnel in their areas. Members
of all the Panels have reviewed a draft of the present report and have
had an opportunity to comment on it.
(Appendix B).
areas of special-
Four of them are
research personnel needs and
NIH, ADAMHA, AND HRA
Although NIH has been designated the lead agency for the study and
provides financial support for it, ADAMHA and possibly the Health
Resources Administration (HRA) also are affected by the provisions of
the Act. All three agencies have an interest in the study. They have
provided program data, interpretations of administrative policies and
procedures, and other kinds of assistance to the Committee. In turn,
the Committee, through its staff, has kept the agencies informed about
the progress of the study. To facilitate the exchange of program data
and related information, two working groups are being established:
(1) Data and Administrative Procedures and (2) Coordination of Studies.
Representatives of the NIH/ADAMHA/HRA staffs and Committee staff will
serve as members of the groups, which will meet monthly.
OTHER ORGANIZATIONS
Interest in the study and concern about the problems it addresses
are widespread throughout the academic community. The Committee has
endeavored to provide information about its work to the several
interested publics through a variety of means: news releases, dis-
tribution of copies of the feasibility report, interviews, meetings
with representatives of professional societies, correspondence with
interested persons, and specific queries and requests for information
17
OCR for page 18
to individuals and organizations. Many of the members of the Committee
and its Panels are active in the affairs of the scientific and profes-
sional societies in the biomedical and behavioral sciences and have-
served as information links.
STAFF AND CONSULTANTS
The committee for the feasibility study recommended that adequate
resources be provided to assist the Committee in carrying out the
demanding tasks called for in the Act, envisioning a steady-state
budgetary level of almost $1 million annually and a staff of about 25
persons. It was recognized at the same time that it would not be
possible to reach this level Immediately and that indeed some quite
different level might seem more suitable upon closer examination of
the work ahead.
During the period February 28 to June 1, 1975, the Committee has
had the assistance of five professional staff members, seconded from
the staff of the Commission on Human Resources, and an administrative
and secretarial staff of three. It has also received effective
assistance from five consultants, who provided specialized services
in several areas of concern to the Committee.
ORGANIZATION OF THIS REPORT
The Committee provides in this first report some data, observa-
tions, and statements of principle that are relevant to its recommenda-
tions, as well as the recommendations themselves. The latter were
presented in the front of this report and include not only numerical
recommendations of training levels, but also - and importantly-
recommendations to ensure that a high quality of predoctoral and
postdoctoral training will be maintained in each of four broad dis-
ciplinary areas. Chapter II describes the training programs--their
development, current levels, and estimated levels in FY 1976. Included
is a brief summary of what is known about the utilization of training
by former fellows and trainees. Chapter III deals with a number of
principles that have guided the Committee in its thinking about the
purposes of research training and the effective allocation of training
resources. A number of problems come to the fore in the application
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ second half of this
or these principles and are ~escrlnea In tne
chapter. In Chapter IV, some significant trends concerning the
development and utilization of biomedical and behavioral research
personnel, selected from a great variety of staff studies, are pre-
sented to provide some indication of the way the complex training/
utilization system seems to be moving. Estimates of the size of the
pool of biomedical and behavioral researchers conclude this section.
18
OCR for page 19
The discussion in Chapter V provides a brief summary of important points
.
In preparing this report, the Committee has been selective rather
than comprehensive. Many additional data were analyzed, but are not
included either because the Committee was dissatisfied with the quality
of the data base or because the studies could not be pursued to a defini-
tive conclusion within the available time. Much of this preliminary work
will be of use in writing later reports.6
6See Appendix D for a discussion of data sources and planned studies.
19
Representative terms from entire chapter:
continuing study
