[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
December 12, 2012

Facing the NIH Funding CrisisHow Professional Societies Can Help

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: American Society of Hematology, Washington, DC (Drs Hromas, Abkowitz, and Keating); Department of Medicine, University of Florida College of Medicine, and Shands Health Care System, Gainesville, Florida (Dr Hromas); Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle (Dr Abkowitz); and Cell Therapy Program, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Dr Keating).

JAMA. 2012;308(22):2343-2344. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.45067

Success rates at obtaining National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding are at historic lows. Last January, the NIH posted an 18% success rate in 2011 for funding of R01 grants deemed scientifically meritorious by peer review.1 R01 grants are the major funding mechanism for individual laboratories and the major funding mechanism for investigator-initiated projects.1 The 18% success rate contrasts with rates of 22% in 2010, 25% to 32% in 1993-2003, and 45% to 58% in 1962-1966. The decrease in funding is a combination of many factors. There was an increase in the number of applications (a record 49 592 in 2011) and an increase in ongoing commitments to already funded research projects. For example, 75% of the $15.8 billion that the NIH spent on extramural grants went to existing projects in 2010.1 One contributing factor to the increase in applications is that mandated reductions in grant budgets require a given laboratory to have more grants to support the same research effort. Another factor is increasing biomedical inflation, which, given flat budgets, also means that more grants are required to support the equivalent effort.2 Nonetheless, biomedical science in the United States faces an unprecedented, dismal situation, with application success rates for NIH extramural research projects at an all-time low.

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview