May 2010

Yes, We CAN: Healthcare Law Includes New NIH Grant Program

Finally, ex officio members will include a representative from the NIH, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, the National Science Foundation and the FDA.

The Board will advise the NIH director on significant barriers to successful translation of basic science into clinical application. It also will provide recommendations to the director if such a barrier is identified. If the NIH director does not accept the recommendations, he or she must explain to the board why he or she has not done so.

Grants

The CAN will set up a series of grant programs designed to facilitate the development of high need cures that are in compliance with FDA standards regarding the drug development and approval process. Eligible entities include private or public research institutions, academic institutions, medical centers, biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, disease or patient advocacy organizations and academic research institutions.

There are three types of awards. Cures Acceleration Partnership Awards provide up to $15 million per project for the first year in one lump sum. It appears that additional increments of up to $15 million can be applied for in subsequent fiscal years (not clear whether more than one additional year of funding is allowed). The recipient also must come up with nonfederal matching funds in a ratio of $1 for each $3 of federal funds received. The matching-fund requirement can be waived by the director.

Cures Acceleration Grant Awards also are funded at up to $15 million the first year, with at least one follow-up funding cycle with up to an additional $15 million possible. There is no matching requirement for this type of award.

Cures Acceleration Flexible Research Awards allow the NIH director to use “other transactions” besides contracts, grants or cooperative agreements to carry out the goals and objectives of the award program. No more than 20 percent of the total funds available for the CAN program can be spent in this manner, however.

Concerns have been expressed about the nature of this new program at NIH, and it will be interesting to learn more about what NIH officials think of it in the coming months. (We already are hearing rumblings that it is worrisome to certain IC directors, who wonder where the funding is going to come from in a tight money environment.) The main fear is that this program will become yet another unfunded mandate that NIH is expected to fund out of its existing budget. Another concern is that the program appears to be redundant: There already are programs at NIH designed to implement the goals of this program.

The new 24-member board sets up yet another bureaucratic structure to which the NIH director must report, and the membership seems heavily tilted away from traditional basic research. The trend is even more obvious by the requirement that NIH form a closer relationship with the FDA, which is not necessarily a bad thing, but it does seem to indicate a lessening of interest by Congress in NIH maintaining its historic focus on basic biomedical research.

Nevertheless, the CAN program is now enshrined into law, and the task of the biomedical research community is to make sure it functions in a way that is the least damaging to basic research. For starters, making sure that it is funded adequately with new money will be a goal in the coming year.

Peter Farnham (pfarnham@asbmb.org) is director of public affairs at ASBMB.

NEXT PAGE 1 | 2

First Name:
Last Name:
Email:
Comment:


Comment on this item:
Rating:
Our comments are moderated. Maximum 1000 characters. We would appreciate it if you signed your name to your comment.


  


There aren't any comments on this item yet. Tell us what you think!

0 Comments

Page 1 of 1

found= true726