FR AB - Science Reference

Research Equipment and
Resource Requirements of
NIH-Supported Investigators:
An Assessment of
Current Conditions and
Recommendations for
Future Funding
and Programs
Tamara R. Zemlo, PhD, MPH;
Howard H. Garrison, PhD;
David Lester, PhD; Mustafa
Lokhandwala, PhD; Fred Naider,
PhD; Stephen White, PhD;
and David W. Speicher, PhD
The Federation of American Societies for
Experimental Biology, Bethesda, MD
Reprinted with permission from FASEB © 2000.
ADDRESS CORRESPONDENCE AND REPRINT REQUESTS TO: The Federation
of American Societies for Experimental Biology, Office of
Public Affairs, 9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20814-3998
(www.faseb.org/opar).
166 JOURNAL OF BIOMOLECULAR TECHNIQUES, VOLUME 11, ISSUE 4, DECEMBER 2000
REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Journal of Biomolecular Techniques
11:166–176
RF AB
In response to a growing level of concern over
unmet needs for advanced instrumentation, the Science
Policy Committee of the Federation of American
Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB) decided
to undertake a systematic look at the way in which
current programs were meeting researchers’ needs
for major equipment. In November of 1999, a questionnaire
was mailed to 1,000 recipients of R01
awards from the National Institutes of Health (NIH)
to determine the researchers’ views about the following
issues: degree of dependence on instrumentation;
current funding arrangements; access to
equipment; and adequacy of funding for instrumentation,
particularly the Shared Instrumentation Grants
(SIG) program; and priorities for future federal funding.
508 scientists, representing 51 percent of the
sample, returned completed surveys. Survey respondents
were similar to all NIH R01 grantees in terms of
institutional affiliations, experience as principal investigators
and laboratory budgets.
There was strong agreement about the importance
of advanced instrumentation for NIH-funded
research. Most of the survey respondents (84 percent)
responded that, “shared equipment and core facilities
at my institution are extremely important for my
research.” However, a substantial number of scientists
reported difficulty in obtaining adequate access to
these critical technologies. Almost half of the respondents
(48 percent) felt that their institutions were not
able to implement new, shared research instrumentation
and resources in a timely manner. Only a small
percentage of the respondents (5 percent) were
strongly supportive of the view that their institutions
were able to adopt new technologies in a timely
manner.
A sizeable portion of the survey respondents also
questioned the adequacy of current funding for