The Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (2013) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
1 Mission, Evolution, and Context
1 Mission, Evolution, and Context
Pages 9-24
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 9... ...
Atkinson, Director, National Science Foundation, Memorandum to Members of the Science Board, Subject: Program Plan for Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research, January 4, 1978 Under the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010,4 Congress mandated that the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
|
From page 10... ...
Given the complexity of the program, the first task of the committee was to determine what it could expect to accomplish with the available time and resources. To comply with the 2010 America COMPETES Reauthorization Act and ensure that a full understanding of the programs was available to the committee from the beginning, the committee held its first meeting once all the agencies completed a congressionally mandated summary of its program and then devoted that meeting to hearing presentations from the directors of all of the active programs.
|
From page 11... ...
, 761-782. Yonghong Wu, "Tackling Undue Concentration of Federal Research Funding: An Empirical Assessment on NSF's Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR)
|
From page 12... ...
All of the states provided interesting information about how they used funds from the various EPSCoR programs and anecdotal evidence of success, but they did not have readily available the type and amount of standardized quantitative data that would make it possible to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of state efforts. Given the ambiguity over common factors such as eligibility and mission between agencies and the scarcity of rigorous data and scholarly assessment literature, the committee decided early in its deliberations that it would focus on evaluating core concerns.
|
From page 13... ...
Atkinson contended that NSF should continue to focus its funding activities on rewarding scientific excellence through a review process dedicated to transparency, competition, and "recognizable" merit. However, he also urged the board to launch an "experimental" program "to stimulate competitively meritorious research in regions that are not able to compete successfully." He observed that "significant national, as well as local, benefits would be derived from each states' participation in the national scientific enterprise." EPSCoR programs have proven to be immensely popular among their advocates.
|
From page 14... ...
10 NSF Memorandum to Members of the National Science Board, Office of the Director, "Program Plan for Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research," January 4, 1978. 11 Measures calling for achieving satisfactory progress toward the programs' primary goals were vaguely defined at the time EPSCoR was created and never clarified or enforced by the federal agencies.
|
From page 15... ...
1980 to begin programmatic research capacity building activities. EPSCOR EXPANSION Expansion of Agency Participation Since 1979, EPSCoR programs have been introduced in seven federal agencies (see Figure 1-1)
|
From page 16... ...
However, to avoid repeating this cumbersome phrase, the committee decided instead to use the term EPSCoR to refer to the entire group of programs, including the IDeA program at NIH. When the report is addressing a specific program, it refers to NSF EPSCoR, NASA EPSCoR, NIH IDeA, and so on.
|
From page 17... ...
NSF's EPSCoR program had 31 eligible states in FY 2012. Moreover, states that have become eligible for EPSCoR in recent years -- including Delaware, Iowa, Missouri, Rhode Island, and Tennessee -- have tended to be larger, wealthier, and more "research proficient" than earlier EPSCoR states (see Figure 1-3)
|
From page 18... ...
However, it is now proposing a shift to a system that would admit all states that fall below the median in total NIH research funding. Using total funding as a yardstick raises questions because of the large differences in state populations.
|
From page 19... ...
Table 1-1. Ranking States Based on Per Capita Federal Academic Science and Engineering Support and Assuming 31 EPSCoR Jurisdictions, EPSCoR Eligibility Changes Dramatically States Ranked According to Per Capita Federal Academic S&E Support 1.
|
From page 20... ...
Whereas the original program mandate focused on building research capacity and competitiveness, the Federal Register now recognizes goals related to broadening opportunities for underrepresented populations, promoting a knowledge-based economy, nurturing innovation and spurring "positive change
|
From page 21... ...
To meet growing national challenges in science education and training, for example, NSF and other federal agencies have pursued measures to increase the diversity of the science, technology, engineering and mathematics workforce and to raise public appreciation for science. Through a combination of direct congressional action and agency interpretations of their mandates, EPSCoR programs have adopted aims related to promoting greater institutional collaboration, aligning scientific research with national needs, fostering workforce diversity, and building a sustainable physical research infrastructure to create a solid foundation for scientific capacity building (see Figure 1-4)
|
From page 22... ...
In light of declining research budgets and increasing global scientific competition, the critical question for federal EPSCoR managers may not be whether EPSCoR should strictly adhere to its historic mandate but whether the program can meet the critical challenges that stakeholders will face in the years ahead. Since advocates maintain that promoting geographic equity maximizes access to talent and helps maintain U.S.
|
From page 23... ...
in non-EPSCoR states have become significantly wealthier and stronger than they were 35 years ago. The number of research institutions competing for funding has increased steadily during the second half of the 20th century to more than 200 research universities.
|
From page 24... ...
Whether the nation is best served by diversifying scientific capacity or by concentrating on a few centers of excellence in selected thematic areas may prove central to the size and shape of future EPSCoR appropriations. Declining Research Budgets Budget concerns -- both at the federal and state levels -- also pose difficulties for EPSCoR managers and beneficiaries.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.