federal research in progress

Back to Appendix C-TOC

Medical Technology Assessment Directory: A Pilot Reference To Organizations, Assessments, and Information Resources.

Hardcopy Version at National Academies Press

National Technical Information Service Publications and Data

Source: National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, 703-487-4650

Subject: Among the subject categories of the NTIS information classification system are biomedical technology and human factors engineering; computers, control, and information theory; government inventions for licensing; health planning and health services research; library and information sciences; and medicine and biology.

Content: NTIS BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE has bibliographic summaries of NTIS reports. 1986 Published Search Catalog provides bibliographic citations of NTIS reports in such areas as diagnostic agents, health care costs, health information systems, health insurance, HMOs, mechanical organs, medical computer applications, medical equipment, and medical imaging. Among weekly NTIS abstract newsletters covering new entries to NTIS collection are Biomedical Technology & Human Factors Engineering, Health Planning & Health Services Research, Government Inventions for Licensing , and Medicine & Biology . FEDRIP (Federal Research in Progress) database provides bibliography of ongoing federally funded research projects, including NIH , VA , other sources.

NTIS provides data files from such agencies as NCHS (health and vital statistics), NCHSR (hospital care, home care, national medical expenditures, HMOs, services to the elderly), and FDA (summary reports of newly approved medical products, national drug code directory). Monthly Tech Notes provides fact sheets on new applied technology and R&D results in medicine and biology and other fields; these are compiled by subject in Federal Technology Catalogs . Other products are Directory of Federal Laboratory & Technology Resources and Government Reports Annual Index .

Compilation: NTIS holdings are compiled from scientific, technical, engineering, and business studies sponsored by the U.S. government and international sources. Among the federal sources are CDC , DOD, EPA , FDA , NASA , NCHS , NCHSR, NIH , NLM , USDA , and VA . NTIS BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE includes 1.2 million records, increased by 70,000/year. Collection contains 350,000 technical reports from other countries.

Access: NTIS information is available in technical reports, software, data files, databases, abstract newsletters, published searches, and other formats. Guide to NTIS brochure provides overview to resources and access information. Charges for printed reports generally cover the cost of duplication plus $3 handling fee. Annual subscription charges range from $79 to $205 for weekly abstract newsletters, $127 for monthly Tech Notes . NTIS BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE is available through DIALOG 800-227-1960, SDC Search Services 800-421-7229, and Bibliographic Retrieval Services 800-833-4707. Database search help is available at no charge from NTIS 703-487-4640; call 703-487-4929 for international access information. NTIS sales desk 703-487-4650; for rush orders call 800-336-4700, 703-487-4700 in Virginia.

Cite this Page Institute of Medicine (US) Council on Health Care Technology; Goodman C, editor. Medical Technology Assessment Directory: A Pilot Reference To Organizations, Assessments, and Information Resources. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 1988. National Technical Information Service Publications and Data.
PDF version of this title (3.5M)
Disable Glossary Links

Recent Activity

National Technical Information Service Publications and Data - Medical Technolog... National Technical Information Service Publications and Data - Medical Technology Assessment Directory

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

Skip to main content
Skip to FDA Search
Skip to in this section menu
Skip to footer links

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration

Search
Menu
FDA Organization
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research | CDER

Research in Progress | Office of Prescription Drug Promotion (OPDP) Research

OPDP’s research team is involved in many ongoing research projects. These studies will inform our understanding of important issues related to prescription drug promotion.

Before research is fielded, the public has the opportunity to offer feedback on OPDP research through the public comment process. We appreciate and consider all comments which seek to assist us in improving the quality of our research. If you would like to contribute your comments, check the Federal Register for OPDP research projects by going to www.regulations.gov . The research team can also be reached directly by email at [email protected]

Additional information about select research in progress along with links to appropriate Federal Register notices is available below.

Adherence Potential and Patient Preference in Prescription Drug Promotion

This study builds on OPDP’s portfolio of research on market claims and disclosures to explore the influence of statements around patient adherence and preference in prescription drug promotion. It is not known how claims that appeal to the possibility for greater adherence or to social norms around what other patients or healthcare providers prefer influence behavioral intentions or risk, benefit, and adherence perceptions of a drug. A related question is whether including a disclosure stating the uncertainty around such claims (e.g., there is no conclusive research on whether DRUG A results in better adherence) can mitigate any misleading perceptions or influence preferences. Some evidence suggests that disclosures in prescription drug promotion are typically noticed and may help consumers and healthcare providers understand information, but this topic has not been investigated in the context of adherence claims. To complete this research, we will show participants a website for a fictitious prescription drug product for type 2 diabetes. We will vary the website based on whether the fictitious prescription drug promotional communication includes a claim about implied adherence, patient preference, and/or a disclosure that there is no conclusive research on adherence. Recruitment will occur by email through an internet panel, and participant eligibility will be determined with a screener at the beginning of the online survey. Each participant will see one of eight versions of a consumer web page for a fictitious prescription diabetes treatment, as reflected by the 2 (implied adherence claim) x 2 (patient preference claim) x 2 (disclosure) design. They will answer a questionnaire designed to take no more than 20 minutes regarding benefit and risk perceptions, adherence perceptions, behavioral intentions, adherence claim retention, and patient preference claim retention.

Disclosures in Professional and Consumer Prescription Drug Promotion

In the course of promoting their products, pharmaceutical sponsors (sponsors) may present a variety of information including the indication, details about the administration of the product, efficacy information, and clinical trial data. In an effort to present often complicated information concisely, sponsors may not include relevant information in the body of the text or visual display of the claim. Additionally, sponsors may not always present limitations to the claim in the main body of the text or display. In these cases, sponsors typically include disclosures of information somewhere in the promotional piece. This research is designed to examine how effectively healthcare professionals and consumers are able to use these disclosures to appropriately qualify the claims presented in the display or claim.

Federal Register Notices: 60-day , 30-day

Dosage Form Presentations in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Television Advertisements

Prior research has demonstrated that patients tend to prefer certain medication dosage forms over others, such as oral medications over injectable medications. Cognizant of these patient preferences, prescription drug sponsors may choose to minimize the presentation of lesser preferred dosage forms in direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug television advertisements. Whether such minimization occurs and any effects on consumer judgement and decision-making are currently unknown. In addition, it is currently unclear how best to present dosage form information generally in DTC television ads such that this information will be adequately processed and retained by consumers.

The proposed research will provide an assessment of the following:

Common dosage form presentations in DTC television ads;
Baseline consumer attitudes about dosage form presentations in DTC television ads; and
Effects of dual modality and placement of dosage form information in DTC television ads.

More information 

A Content Analysis of Dosage Form Presentations in Prescription Drug TV Ads

Endorser Status and Actual Use in Direct-to-Consumer Television Ads

The objective of the present research is to conduct experimental studies to examine issues related to endorsers in direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug promotion. This study complements one that has recently been completed (FDA-2019-N-5900, OMB control number 0910-0894, Expiration Date: March 31, 2023). As that study examined a number of different endorser types in print or internet settings and focused on examining how various disclosures of the payment status of the endorser influenced audience reactions, this proposed research extends the prior research by examining actual-use disclosures and a different medium. The present research will specifically examine the influence of two independent variables--endorser type (patient, physician) and an actual-use disclosure (utilizer, actor, none)--in television advertisements. Dependent variables will include perceptions of the risks and benefits of the promoted prescription drug, attitudes toward and perceptions of the endorser, attention paid to the ad, and behavioral intentions. Because age and education level may affect perceptions of the ad, we plan to explore whether age and education level influence these effects.

This research will involve two studies. Studies 1 and 2 will use a 2 × 3 factorial design run concurrently and independently with a sample of consumers who have been diagnosed with diabetes (Study 1) or rheumatoid arthritis (Study 2), each watching a DTC television ad for a fictitious drug indicated to treat the corresponding medical conditions. The ad will be manipulated to assess the impact of two categories of commonly used industry spokespeople: a patient and a physician. We will test three actual-use disclosure conditions: (1) an actual-use disclosure that indicates that the endorser either uses or prescribes the prescription drug in real life (i.e., utilizer), (2) an actual-use disclosure that specifies the endorser is an actor, and (3) a control with no actual-use disclosure. Each participant will see one of six versions of a television ad for a fictitious prescription diabetes or rheumatoid arthritis treatment, and they will answer a questionnaire designed to take no more than 20 minutes.

Federal Register Notices: 60-day , 30 day

Examination of Secondary Claim Disclosures and Biosimilar Disclosures in Prescription Drug Promotional Materials

The purpose of this research is to build on prior FDA research on the topic of disclosures by examining the impact of disclosures of two different types of information. Phase 1 of the proposed research will examine the impact of adding a disclosure about a secondary claim in direct-to-consumer (DTC) and healthcare provider (HCP)-directed promotion in the context of a prescription drug website. We will also examine the effect of the presence of a comparative claim about the secondary claim. We will examine four levels of secondary claim disclosure to explore the effects of disclosing that the secondary benefit is not one of the indicated uses of the product (e.g., not a treatment for [the secondary benefit claim], quantitative information about claim, not a treatment for [claim] and quantitative information about claim, or no disclosure), and two levels (presence or absence) of a comparative element regarding the secondary claim, for a total of eight experimental conditions. In Phase 2 we will assess the impact of a disclosure designating the product as a biosimilar as well as varying basic factual statements about biosimilars. In both consumer and HCP audiences, will examine the impact of: (1) Adding a disclosure designating the product as a biosimilar; (2) adding general informational statements about biosimilars; and (3) naming a reference product.

Federal Register Notice: 60-day 30 day

Experimental Study of an Accelerated Approval Disclosure

Pursuant to section 506(c) of the FD&C Act and 21 CFR part 314, subpart H (or 21 CFR part 601, subpart E for biological products), FDA may grant accelerated approval to a drug product under section 505(c) of the FD&C Act or a biological product under section 351(a) of the Public Health Service Act. This pathway enables faster approval of prescription drugs intended to treat serious or life-threatening illnesses. Accelerated approval may be based on a determination that a drug product has an effect on a surrogate endpoint (for example, a blood test result) that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit (i.e., an intermediate clinical endpoint). Under FDA’s regulations governing physician labeling for prescription drugs, the INDICATIONS AND USAGE section of the FDA-approved prescribing information (PI) for a drug approved under accelerated approval must include “a succinct description of the limitations of usefulness of the drug and any uncertainty about anticipated clinical benefits, with reference to the ‘Clinical Studies’ section for a discussion of the available evidence.” 21 CFR 201.57(c)(2)(i)(B) . This study will examine the presence, wording, and prominence of a disclosure communicating information related to the drug’s accelerated approval in direct-to-consumer (DTC) promotional materials.

Federal Register Notices: 60-day , 30-day , 60-day , 30-day

Medical Conference Attendees’ Observations about Prescription Drug Promotion

The current study focuses on the landscape of healthcare provider (HCP)-directed promotion of prescription drugs at medical conferences in general and, more specifically, at pharmaceutical promotional booths. We will ask attendees who are prescribers within different disciplines (primary care physicians, specialists, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants) general questions about their attendance at medical conferences, including questions about their motivations for attending, activities they participate in (e.g., symposia, poster sessions, social events, exhibit halls), and their opinions about the prescription drug treatments promoted at medical conferences. We will also embed an experimental manipulation into the survey, whereby participants watch a video that mimics a pharmaceutical representative/HCP interaction, and varies in the professional expertise of the pharmaceutical representative (medical vs. business) and whether or not the discussion includes a disclosure of important limitations. Approximately 350 HCPs will be recruited from 12 medical conferences over the course of one year. The entire online survey, including the experiment, will take approximately 20 minutes.

Federal Register Notices: 60-day , 30-day

Perceptions of Prescription Drug Products with Medication Tracking Capabilities

Patient non-adherence to medication regimens is a challenge in health care. As attention to the public health issue of medication adherence has grown, OPDP has noted an increase in the number of claims and presentations in prescription drug promotion that focus on a product’s potential to improve adherence to treatment regimens. Many of these presentations include information about options available to help patients track their medication usage. The focus of the present study is to explore patient and health care provider perceptions of a fictitious prescription drug product that is accompanied by software that is intended to track medication use. Research questions include perceptions about the product’s risks and/or benefits (including its effect on medication adherence) when the promotion claims this tracking ability; and whether a disclosure that describes what is known about the effect of medication tracking on medication adherence has an influence on perceptions of the product’s risks and/or benefits (including its effect on medication adherence). Primary care physicians and consumers will be recruited to view one of a number of websites for a fictitious diabetes drug and asked to answer questions about it. We will use statistical methods such as analysis of variance to analyze the data.

Prescription Drug Promotion: State of the Literature and Consumer/HCP Perspectives on Emerging Topics

A significant amount of research pertinent to prescription drug promotion has now been conducted. As examples, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Office of Prescription Drug Promotion (OPDP) has focused efforts on three main topic areas: advertising features, including content and format; target populations; and research quality. This research is presented on OPDP’s webpage, available at https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/center-drug-evaluation-andresearch-cder/office-prescription-drug-promotion-opdp-research. Outside of FDA, researchers at academic institutions and other organizations have pursued lines of inquiry relevant to prescription drug promotion as well. Given this now substantial research literature, it is an ideal time to consider and evaluate what is known about key topics concerning prescription drug promotion as well as to identify emerging topics and research gaps.

The objective of this research is to conduct a scoping review of the research literature on prescription drug promotion, with an emphasis on research completed within the last decade (2011-2021); and additionally conduct remote, semi-structured interviews with consumers and healthcare providers to probe on emerging topics identified in the scoping literature review.

A Scoping Review of Empirical Research on Prescription Drug Promotion
OMB generic information collection control number: 0910-0695

Study of Disclosures to Health Care Providers Regarding Data That Do Not Support Unapproved Use of an Approved Prescription Drug

Pharmaceutical firms sometimes choose to disseminate publications to health care providers (HCPs) that include data that appear to support an unapproved use of an approved product. At the same time, published data that are not supportive of that unapproved use may also exist. For example, unsupportive published information could describe an increased risk of negative outcomes (e.g., death, relapse) from the unapproved use of the approved product, suggesting that the unapproved use does not have a positive benefit-risk ratio. The purpose of this research is to examine HCPs' perceptions and behavioral intentions about an unapproved new use of an approved prescription drug when made aware of other data that are not supportive of the unapproved use. Five approaches will be examined: (1) The provision of the unsupportive data in the form of a representative publication; (2) a disclosure summarizing the unsupportive data and including a citation to the representative publication; (3) a disclosure that does not include a summary of the unsupportive data but does acknowledge that unsupportive data exist and includes a citation to the representative publication; (4) a general disclosure that unsupportive data may exist, without conceding that such data do exist; or (5) nothing—the absence of any presentation of unsupportive data or any disclosure about such data (control condition).

Federal Register Notice: 60-day , 30-day

A Survey on Quantitative Claims in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Advertising

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug advertising may make quantitative claims about the drug's efficacy or risks. Although there is research and FDA guidance (“Presenting Quantitative Efficacy and Risk Information in Direct-to-Consumer Promotional Labeling and Advertisements,” available at https://www.fda.gov/media/117573/download) that provides general guidelines for how to present quantitative information, it is not fully understood how consumers will interpret specific quantitative claims. We conducted a literature review and found that while some types of quantitative information are well-studied (e.g., relative frequencies), many questions remain on how best to communicate certain quantitative information about prescription drugs. For example, we do not have sufficient information about how consumers interpret different claims describing medians (e.g., “People treated with Drug X lived for a median of 8 months” alone or in combination with a definition such as “In people receiving Drug X, this means that about half lived more than 8 months and about half lived less than 8 months” or “A median is the middle number in a group of numbers ordered from smallest to largest”). This study aims to survey U.S. adults about their interpretation of specific quantitative claims.

Federal Register Notice: 60-day

Targeted Mechanism of Action Presentations in Prescription Drug Promotion

In 2014, OPDP conducted focus groups designed to provide insights on how consumers and healthcare providers (HCPs), including physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants, interpret the term “targeted” in prescription drug promotional materials. Although diverse views were voiced, there appeared to be some tendency toward the impression that products with promotional materials using this term would be safer and more effective than other similar treatments. OPDP is also now conducting a nationally representative survey regarding the ways in which consumers and primary care physicians interpret terms and phrases commonly used in prescription drug promotional materials, including assessment of impressions of the terms “targeted” and “targeted mechanism of action” (targeted MoA) (86 FR 24867). Building upon this line of research, the proposed study will investigate the influence of targeted MoA claims, graphics, and disclosures that provide context about a drug’s targeted MoA, utilizing an experimental design with both consumer and HCP samples. The experimental approach described here is intended to complement and augment the prior research by facilitating assessment of causality. Specifically, the study will explore how varied targeted MoA presentations affect consumer and HCP understanding of the MoA of a drug, perception of drug benefits and risks, attention to risk information, and interest in the drug.

Text Analysis of Proprietary Drug Name Interpretations

As part of the prescription drug regulatory review process, sponsors propose proprietary names for their products. These names undergo a proprietary name review (PNR) that involves the Office of Drug Safety, the relevant medical office, and OPDP. OPDP reviews names to assess for alignment with the FD&C Act, which provides, among other things, that labeling can misbrand a product if false or misleading representations are made (see 21 U.S.C. 321(n) and 352(a)). A proprietary name that appears in labeling could result in such misbranding if it is false or misleading. OPDP reviews, among other things, whether names (1) overstate the efficacy or safety of the drug, (2) suggest drug indications that are not accurate, (3) suggest superiority without substantiation, or (4) are of a fanciful nature that misleadingly implies unique effectiveness or composition. It would be helpful in OPDP’s review of promotional implications of proprietary names for data on consumer and prescriber interpretations of proposed proprietary names to be more readily available for consideration. The present research will utilize text analysis (e.g., topic modeling and sentiment analysis) to ascertain how consumer and primary care physician populations interpret prescription drug names, which will assist OPDP’s consideration of promotional implications.

Tradeoff Analysis of Prescription Drug Product Claims in Direct-to-Consumer and Healthcare Provider Promotion

When confronted with an important decision, people tend to make choices that reflect a series of tradeoffs between certain desirable and undesirable attributes of a product, service, or experience. The treatment preferences of diagnosed consumers and treating physicians have been shown to be influenced by certain characteristics, such as the perceived drug’s impact on quality of life, complexity of dosage regimens, mode of administration, cost to family and self, and marketing claims unrelated to medicinal properties. Although diagnosed consumers may weigh the risks, benefits, or other salient characteristics of prescription drug products differently than physicians, little research directly compares the treatment preferences of these two groups. Understanding the tradeoffs among drug product characteristics diagnosed consumers make--and how the tradeoffs could potentially differ from the tradeoffs made by physicians--will provide valuable insight into the relevance and impact of various product attributes and promotional claims on informed choices and treatment decisions. The proposed research will use conjoint analysis techniques to examine the relative importance of prescription drug product information such as prescription drug efficacy, risk, adherence, and patient preference claims in two medical conditions (type 2 diabetes and psoriasis) in consumer and physician samples.

About Grants

Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR)

The RPPR is used by recipients to submit progress reports to NIH on their grant awards. This page provides an overview of the annual RPPR, the final RPPR and the interim RPPR and provides resources to help you understand how to submit a progress report.

Types of RPPRs

Progress reports document recipient accomplishments and compliance with terms of award. There are three types of RPPRs, all of which use the NIH RPPR Instruction Guide .

Annual RPPR – Use to describe a grant’s scientific progress, identify significant changes, report on personnel, and describe plans for the subsequent budget period or year.

Final RPPR – Use as part of the grant closeout process to submit project outcomes in addition to the information submitted on the annual RPPR, except budget and plans for the upcoming year.

Interim RPPR – Use when submitting a renewal (Type 2) application. If the Type 2 is not funded, the Interim RPPR will serve as the Final RPPR for the project. If the Type 2 is funded, the Interim RPPR will serve as the annual RPPR for the final year of the previous competitive segment. The data elements collected on the Interim RPPR are the same as for the Final RPPR, including project outcomes.

Submitting the RPPR

Only the project director/principal investigator (PD/PI) or their PD/PI delegate can initiate RPPRs. For multi-PD/PI grants only the Contact PI or the Contact PD/PI’s delegate can initiate the RPPR.

Signing Officials typically submit the annual RPPR, but may delegate preparation (Delegate Progress Report) to any PD/PI within the organization on behalf of the Contact PD/PI. Additionally, a Principal Investigator (PI) can delegate “Progress Report” to any eRA Commons user in their organization with the Assistant (ASST) role. This delegation provides the ASST with the ability to prepare Annual, Interim and Final RPPRs on behalf of the PI. However, only a Signing Official (SO) or PI (if delegated Submit by the SO) are allowed to submit the Annual, Interim, and Final RPPRs.

Follow the instructions in the RPPR User Guide to submit the RPPR, Interim RPPR or Final RPPR. The User Guide includes instructions for how to submit your RPPRs in the eRA Commons, how to complete the web-based forms, and what information is required. Instructions for completing the scientific portion of the report (see the elements below) may be found in Chapters 6 and 7.

The following resources may help with RPPR initiation and submission:

Annual RPPR Due Dates:

Streamlined Non-Competing Award Process (SNAP) RPPRs are due approximately 45 days before the next budget period start date.
Non-SNAP RPPRs are due approximately 60 days before the next budget period start date.
Multi-year funded (MYF) RPPRs are due annually on or before the anniversary of the budget/project period start date of the award.
The exact start date for a specific award may be found in grants status in eRA Commons.

Interim and Final RPPR Dues Dates:

120 days from period of performance end date for the competitive segment

The RPPR requests various types of information, including:

Accomplishments

What were the major goals and objectives of the project?

What was accomplished under these goals?

What opportunities for training and professional development did the project provide?

How were the results disseminated to communities of interest?

What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals and objectives?

publications, conference papers, and presentations

website(s) or other Internet site(s)

technologies or techniques

inventions, patent applications, and/or licenses

other products, such as data or databases, physical collections, audio or video products, software, models, educational aids or curricula, instruments or equipment, research material, interventions (e.g., clinical or educational), or new business creation.

Participants and Other Collaborating Organizations

Changes/Problems (not required for Final or Interim RPPR)

Changes in approach and reasons for change

Actual or anticipated problems or delays and actions or plans to resolve them

Changes that have a significant impact on expenditures

Significant changes in use or care of human subjects, vertebrate animals, biohazards, and/or select agents

Budgetary Information (not required for Final or Interim RPPR)

Project Outcomes (only required on Final and Interim RPPR)

Concise summary of the outcomes or findings of the award, written for the general public in clear and comprehensible language, without including any proprietary, confidential information or trade secrets

This page last updated on: November 2, 2022

Bookmark & Share
E-mail Updates
Help Downloading Files
Privacy Notice
Accessibility
National Institutes of Health (NIH), 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, Maryland 20892
NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health

E-NEWSLETTER

SCIENCE & ENGINEERING INDICATORS

Research and development: u.s. trends and international comparisons.

Report PDF (808 KB)
Report - All Formats .ZIP (5.2 MB)
Supplemental Materials - All Formats .ZIP (513 KB)
MORE DOWNLOADS OPTIONS
Share on X/Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on LinkedIn
Send as Email

Federal Support for U.S. R&D

U.S. federal obligations for R&D and R&D plant are presented by fiscal year, through FY 2023, in current U.S. dollars. (FY 2023 data are preliminary and are subject to revisions.) Obligations offer a different and complementary perspective of federal R&D funding discussed earlier using National Patterns statistics. Obligations represent the monetary amount for orders placed, contracts awarded, services received, and other similar transactions by federal agencies, regardless of when the funds were appropriated and when future payments may be required. Funding may be devoted to internal or intramural R&D performance (agency laboratories and other facilities as well as FFRDCs) or to external performers, notably academic institutions for basic research, as well as businesses, state and local governments, and nonprofit organizations.

Federal funding for R&D has been a key feature of U.S. science and technology policy for decades, supporting national defense, space exploration, energy, health, general science, and other national goals (CRS 2022c; Mowery 1992; Pece 2023a; NASEM 2020). Since 2008, total obligations for R&D and R&D plant have fluctuated, with notable increases in FYs 2009–10 and further increases in 2019–21 ( Table RD-10 ). These earlier fluctuations are partly due to the 2009 ARRA, which brought with it historical R&D funding peaks in FYs 2009 and 2010 (and relative drops in total R&D obligations in the following years). Later increases in FYs 2019–22 were the result of supplemental COVID-19-related appropriations like the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which declined in FY 2023 (Pece 2023b, 2024). In addition to the CARES Act, a number of laws have been enacted that impact federal R&D obligations, including the Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors (CHIPS) and Science Act of 2022 as well as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). For more information on CHIPS, IIJA, and IRA, see Pece (2024). The last section summarizes information on several federal funding areas related to critical and emerging technologies.

Federal obligations for R&D and R&D plant, by agency: FYs 2008–23

na = not applicable.

a Beginning with FY 2016, the totals reported for development obligations represent a refinement to this category by more narrowly defining it to be "experimental development." Most notably, totals for development do not include the Department of Defense (DOD) Budget Activity 7 (Operational Systems Development) obligations. Those funds, previously included in DOD's development obligation totals, support the development efforts to upgrade systems that have been fielded or have received approval for full rate production and anticipate production funding in the current or subsequent fiscal year. Therefore, the data are not directly comparable with totals reported in previous years.

Because of rounding in source tables, detail may not add to total. This table lists (in general) agencies with R&D and R&D plant obligations greater than $100 million in FY 2023. Agency rankings are based on FY 2023 data. All other agencies includes the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Labor, Department of State, Department of the Treasury, Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Appalachian Regional Commission, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Federal Communications Commission, Federal Trade Commission, Library of Congress, National Archives and Records Commission, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Tennessee Valley Authority, RESTORE Act Centers, Agency for Global Media, and Postal Service. FYs 2009–10 obligations include additional funding provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Obligations for FYs 2020–22 include additional funding provided by supplemental COVID-19-related appropriations (e.g., Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security [CARES] Act).

National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, Survey of Federal Funds for Research and Development, Volume 72, FYs 2022–23.

Science and Engineering Indicators

Federal Obligations for R&D and R&D Plant, by Major Agencies

Continuing an ongoing trend, a small number of agencies’ FY 2022 R&D and R&D plant obligations constituted the majority of total federal obligations. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) ($74.4 billion, or 38% of total) and the Department of Defense (DOD) ($72.6 billion, or 37% of total) together accounted for around three-fourths of the $196.6 billion federal total. Other top agencies included the Department of Energy (DOE) ($18.0 billion, or 9% of total), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) ($11.8 billion, or 6% of total), and NSF ($7.4 billion, or 4% of total) ( Table RD-10 ).

In FY 2022, total obligations for R&D and R&D plant remained on par with FY 2021 ($196.6 billion and $193.9 billion, respectively). The CAGR from 2017 to 2022 was 10.1%, with preliminary estimates indicating FY 2023’s funding obligations will decrease slightly to $193.0 billion. DOD R&D and R&D plant obligations increased 2% to $72.6 billion in FY 2022, from $70.9 billion in FY 2021. HHS funding decreased 3% in FY 2022 ($74.4 billion, down from $77.1 billion in FY 2021) following a 25% increase in the year prior (from $61.8 billion in FY 2020) and a 57% increase in FY 2020 (from $39.4 billion in FY 2019).

Distribution of Federal Obligations, by Performer and Type of R&D

Agencies obligate funds for R&D and R&D plant to intramural or extramural performers and for different types of R&D (basic research, applied research, or experimental development). R&D accounted for approximately 97% of the total R&D and R&D plant obligations in FY 2022 ($190.4 billion of the total $196.6 billion), with R&D plant (facilities and major equipment) accounting for the remaining 3% ($6.2 billion) ( Table RD-11 ). For each of the top 15 agencies presented in Table RD-11 , R&D plant accounted for a minority of overall R&D obligations, with DOE having the most R&D plant obligations ($4.3 billion of the total $6.2 billion across all agencies), followed by NSF with $529 million.

Federal obligations for R&D and R&D plant, by agency and performer: FY 2022

Because of rounding in source tables, detail may not add to total. This table lists all agencies covered in Table RD-10 and as ranked there. R&D is basic research, applied research, and experimental development, and it does not include R&D plant. Intramural activities include actual intramural R&D performance and costs associated with planning and administration of both intramural and extramural programs by federal personnel, including federally funded research and development centers. Extramural performers includes federally funded R&D performed in the United States and U.S. territories by businesses, universities and colleges, other nonprofit institutions, state and local governments, and foreign organizations. FY 2022 obligations include additional funding provided by supplemental COVID-19-related appropriations (e.g., Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security [CARES] Act). All other agencies includes the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Labor, Department of State, Department of the Treasury, Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Appalachian Regional Commission, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Federal Communications Commission, Federal Trade Commission, Library of Congress, National Archives and Records Commission, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Tennessee Valley Authority, RESTORE Act Centers, Agency for Global Media, and Postal Service.

Extramural performers (businesses, higher education institutions, nonprofit organizations, state and local governments, and foreign organizations) accounted for 54% of R&D and R&D plant obligations ($105.9 billion) across all agencies in FY 2022, and intramural performers (which include both federal agencies’ conduct of R&D as well as obligations to FFRDCs) accounted for 46% ($90.7 billion). Yet the percentage of FY 2022 federal R&D and R&D plant obligations for extramural recipients varied greatly among agencies. Extramural recipients accounted for 27% of the agency’s total at DOE and 59% at DOD. At NSF and at the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund, extramural performers accounted for all or virtually all R&D and R&D plant funding, with 94% and 100%, respectively ( Table RD-11 ).

Across all agencies, 24% of federal R&D obligations were devoted to basic research ($45.4 billion), 25% to applied research ($48.4 billion), and 51% to experimental development ($96.6 billion) in FY 2022 ( Table RD-12 ). For DOD, 86% of total R&D was for experimental development ($62.2 billion), with 14% for applied research and basic research combined ($10.2 billion). In contrast, at NSF, 85% of R&D obligations were for basic research ($5.9 billion), with 15% ($1.0 billion) for applied research and no obligations for experimental development.

Federal obligations for R&D, by agency and type of R&D: FY 2022

This table lists all agencies covered in Table RD-10 and as ranked there. Because of rounding in source tables, detail may not add to total. FY 2022 obligations include additional funding provided by supplemental COVID-19-related appropriations (e.g., Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security [CARES] Act). All other agencies includes the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Labor, Department of State, Department of the Treasury, Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Appalachian Regional Commission, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Federal Communications Commission, Federal Trade Commission, Library of Congress, National Archives and Records Commission, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Tennessee Valley Authority, RESTORE Act Centers, Agency for Global Media, and Postal Service.

Distribution of Federal Obligations for Research, by S&E Fields

The government funds and performs research in a broad range of science and engineering (S&E) fields, including engineering, computer science and mathematics, environmental science, life sciences, physical sciences, and social sciences. Federal research obligations (basic plus applied research) reached $93.8 billion in FY 2022 across all S&E fields ( Figure RD-13 ; Table SRD-7 ).

For grouped bar charts, Tab to the first data element (bar/line data point) which will bring up a pop-up with the data details
To read the data in all groups Arrow-Down will go back and forth
For bar/line chart data points are linear and not grouped, Arrow-Down will read each bar/line data points in order
For line charts, Arrow-Left and Arrow-Right will move to the next set of data points after Tabbing to the first data point
For stacked bars use the Arrow-Down key again after Tabbing to the first data bar
Then use Arrow-Right and Arrow-Left to navigate the stacked bars within that stack
Arrow-Down to advance to the next stack. Arrow-Up reverses

Federal obligations for research, by agency and major S&E field: FY 2022

DOC = Department of Commerce; DOD = Department of Defense; DOE = Department of Energy; HHS = Department of Health and Human Services; NASA = National Aeronautics and Space Administration; NSF = National Science Foundation; USDA = Department of Agriculture; VA = Department of Veterans Affairs.

The scales differ for total (all agencies) and HHS compared with the scales for the other agencies listed. Research includes basic and applied research.

Obligations for life sciences research were the highest among S&E fields, at $41.6 billion across all agencies (44% of total obligations) ( Figure RD-13 ; Table SRD-7 ). This can primarily be attributed to HHS, which accounted for $34.0 billion , or 82% of total life science obligations. HHS funding also included $4.4 billion (96%) of the total $4.6 billion in psychology obligations across agencies. More broadly, $48.3 billion in overall HHS research obligations (across all S&E fields) accounted for around half of the total $93.8 billion of federal research obligations in FY 2022 ( Table RD-12 ).

Other top agencies in research obligations include DOE, with $5.1 billion obligated for physical sciences (42% of the total $12.1 billion in that field) and $2.9 billion for engineering (19% of the total $15.5 billion across all agencies), and DOD, with $1.9 billion obligated for computer sciences and mathematics research (34% of the total $5.7 billion across all agencies) and $4.9 billion for engineering (31% of total) ( Figure RD-13 ; Table SRD-7 ). NSF research obligations are spread rather evenly among major S&E fields. NSF funds between $1.0 billion and $1.3 billion in each of the computer sciences and mathematics, environmental sciences, physical sciences, and engineering fields and $792 million in life sciences ( Figure RD-13 ; Table SRD-7 ).

Federal R&D Funding for Selected Critical and Emerging Technologies

The federal government has long supported semiconductor and information technology (IT) R&D (NRC 2003). More recently, the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 appropriated $52.7 billion to revitalize the U.S. semiconductor industry through support of U.S. semiconductor fabrication and technology development along the supply chain , including $13.7 billion supporting R&D, workforce development, and related programs (CRS 2023a, 2023b; Zimmermann 2022). Several other recent federal initiatives related to critical and emerging technologies focus on quantum science, advanced IT and AI, and nanotechnology (CRS 2022a, 2022b; USG 2023). The National Quantum Initiative (NQI) Act became Public Law 115-368 in December 2018 to accelerate American leadership in quantum information science and technology. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/6227 (accessed 15 August 2023). Agencies participating in NQI efforts include the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NSF, DOE, DOD, NASA, the National Security Agency, and the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity unit of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. For more details, see (SCQIS/NSTC 2023). For related defense authorization legislation and possible technical applications in this area, see CRS (2022c)." data-bs-content="See https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/6227 (accessed 15 August 2023). Agencies participating in NQI efforts include the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NSF, DOE, DOD, NASA, the National Security Agency, and the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity unit of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. For more details, see (SCQIS/NSTC 2023). For related defense authorization legislation and possible technical applications in this area, see CRS (2022c)." data-endnote-uuid="b0e4e2a7-06f5-42ac-8979-30a1c5fc40c0"> See https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/6227 (accessed 15 August 2023). Agencies participating in NQI efforts include the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NSF, DOE, DOD, NASA, the National Security Agency, and the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity unit of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. For more details, see (SCQIS/NSTC 2023). For related defense authorization legislation and possible technical applications in this area, see CRS (2022c). Agencies with NQI activities reported $855 million in quantum information science R&D expenditures in FY 2021, up from $672 million in FY 2020 and $449 million in FY 2019 (SCQIS/NSTC 2023).

The Networking and Information Technology Research and Development (NITRD) Program coordinates federally funded R&D in advanced IT, networking, and AI. It was launched by the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 and was most recently reauthorized in the 2017 American Innovation and Competitiveness Act (Public Law 114-329). Among agencies participating in the NITRD Program, $1.8 billion was budgeted in FY 2021 for R&D in nondefense AI (NITRD/NAIIO 2022). https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ329/PLAW-114publ329.pdf and https://www.nitrd.gov/ (accessed 15 August 2023). Participating agencies with a program component area for AI R&D in FY 2021 include Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Department of Homeland Security, DOD, DOE, Department of the Interior (DOI), Department of Transportation (DOT), Department of Education, NASA, HHS, Department of Justice (DOJ), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, NSF, and Department of Agriculture (USDA). For more details, see (NITRD/NAIIO 2022)." data-bs-content="See https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ329/PLAW-114publ329.pdf and https://www.nitrd.gov/ (accessed 15 August 2023). Participating agencies with a program component area for AI R&D in FY 2021 include Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Department of Homeland Security, DOD, DOE, Department of the Interior (DOI), Department of Transportation (DOT), Department of Education, NASA, HHS, Department of Justice (DOJ), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, NSF, and Department of Agriculture (USDA). For more details, see (NITRD/NAIIO 2022)." data-endnote-uuid="9306ad71-aa2c-4632-92a5-6d1d9395858c"> See https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ329/PLAW-114publ329.pdf and https://www.nitrd.gov/ (accessed 15 August 2023). Participating agencies with a program component area for AI R&D in FY 2021 include Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Department of Homeland Security, DOD, DOE, Department of the Interior (DOI), Department of Transportation (DOT), Department of Education, NASA, HHS, Department of Justice (DOJ), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, NSF, and Department of Agriculture (USDA). For more details, see (NITRD/NAIIO 2022).

Last, the National Nanotechnology Initiative was launched by the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-153) to “invest in Federal R&D programs in nanotechnology and related sciences” and to “provide for interagency coordination.” Participating agencies budgeted $3.5 billion in FY 2020 (NSET/NSTC 2022) and $3.8 billion in FY 2021 on nanotechnology R&D and related workforce development (NSET/NSTC 2023). The latter included $1.7 billion for COVID-19 diagnostics and vaccine research by the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority within HHS. www.congress.gov/108/plaws/publ153/PLAW-108publ153.pdf and (NSET/NSTC 2023). Participating agencies in FY 2021 include Consumer Product Safety Commission, Department of Commerce, DOD, DOE, DOI, DOJ, DOT, Environmental Protection Agency, HHS, NASA, NSF, and USDA." data-bs-content="See www.congress.gov/108/plaws/publ153/PLAW-108publ153.pdf and (NSET/NSTC 2023). Participating agencies in FY 2021 include Consumer Product Safety Commission, Department of Commerce, DOD, DOE, DOI, DOJ, DOT, Environmental Protection Agency, HHS, NASA, NSF, and USDA." data-endnote-uuid="55594170-62c1-4df0-884c-f0fe026150f3"> See www.congress.gov/108/plaws/publ153/PLAW-108publ153.pdf and (NSET/NSTC 2023). Participating agencies in FY 2021 include Consumer Product Safety Commission, Department of Commerce, DOD, DOE, DOI, DOJ, DOT, Environmental Protection Agency, HHS, NASA, NSF, and USDA.

The Federal Register

The daily journal of the united states government, request access.

Due to aggressive automated scraping of FederalRegister.gov and eCFR.gov, programmatic access to these sites is limited to access to our extensive developer APIs.

If you are human user receiving this message, we can add your IP address to a set of IPs that can access FederalRegister.gov & eCFR.gov; complete the CAPTCHA (bot test) below and click "Request Access". This process will be necessary for each IP address you wish to access the site from, requests are valid for approximately one quarter (three months) after which the process may need to be repeated.

An official website of the United States government.

If you want to request a wider IP range, first request access for your current IP, and then use the "Site Feedback" button found in the lower left-hand side to make the request.

Ohio State nav bar

The Ohio State University

BuckeyeLink
Find People
Search Ohio State

NIMH director discusses progress, opportunities for research during visit at Ohio State

University researchers support prevention, recovery and cure for those struggling with mental illness.

Earlier this month, the director of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) spent a day at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center to help kick off May’s Mental Health Awareness month.

This year, the NIMH is celebrating 75 years of providing federal funding for basic and clinical research on mental health disorders.

Researchers across the nation, including at Ohio State, tap into those funds to study better options for prevention, recovery and cure for those struggling with mental illness.

The NIMH has an annual budget of about $2.5 billion, yet only one in five studies submitted to NIMH is funded, said Joshua A. Gordon, who has led the organization since 2016.

During his visit, Gordon attended a luncheon with Medical Center leaders, Ohio State mental health researchers and local philanthropists who support Ohio State’s vision of research excellence for mental health.

During the luncheon, John J. Warner , CEO of Ohio State Wexner Medical Center and executive vice president at Ohio State, said that it’s important for researchers to know that the community is behind them.

“Mental health care is health care, and the work we’re doing at Ohio State is going to help us make critical advances to help improve the health of Ohioans and people across the world,” Warner said. “That research would not be possible without generous philanthropic support from our donors and community and government partners.”

Since arriving at Ohio State in 2019, K. Luan Phan, chair of psychiatry and behavioral health, has more than doubled the number of faculty in his department. By recruiting world-class clinical and research faculty in key areas, including suicide prevention, trauma/stress, addiction and mood disorders, the department’s research funding has increased more than 10-fold during that time.

“We have brought the best minds to solve the mind’s biggest problems,” Phan said. “It’s so important to have support from all stakeholders, which include the federal government, state government, hospital leaders and community advocates and philanthropic donors, all coming together to help us solve this problem of mental health disorders.”

Together with research partners from other public universities across the state, Phan and his team are leading the $20 million SOAR Studies funded by the state of Ohio. These studies will help identify the modifiable risk and resilience factors of mental illness and addiction to transform the way we understand mental health and they way we treat mental illness to prevent illness, intervene earlier, improve outcomes and save lives.

The studies will enroll 15,000 Ohioans in total, with 1,200 families also participating in a more in-depth study, Phan said. So far, close to 8,000 Ohioans from all 88 counties across the state have enrolled.

“We need to translate academic and ‘research’ findings from the ivory tower into the clinics and community centers where patients and families seek help,” Phan said. “We need to go from thinking about how to improve treatments to actually doing and discovering how to best bring treatments to where people live, work, learn.”

Gordon echoed his support for those donors who are helping to fund mental health research at Ohio State and elsewhere.

“Only when we work together can we solve the most pressing and complex issues facing patients struggling with mental health challenges,” Gordon said. “Mental health research has resulted in great gains for our patients. The research efforts we’re making now will pay off later.”

As part of his visit, Gordon met with students and researchers in small group sessions to learn more about Ohio State studies. He also gave a lecture about NIMH research priorities, including:

Basic biology discoveries
Exploring computational psychiatry
Improving systems of care
Addressing mental health disparities

“We have a lot of work to do,” Gordon said. “We want to improve our treatments and our ability to deliver these treatments to the right people at the right time. I’m impressed with the work of the Ohio State Department of Psychiatry and the SOAR Studies. I’ve not seen another statewide study that is comparable to SOAR in scale or scope.”

More Ohio State News

Ohio state appoints new dean and director of ohio state newark.

The Ohio State University has selected Matthew J. Smith as its next dean and director of The Ohio State University at Newark , effective Aug. 1. Smith currently serves as dean of the College of Humanities and Behavioral Sciences at Radford University , a comprehensive public university in Radford, Virginia, where he is also a professor of communication.

AI poised to usher in new level of concierge services to the public

Concierge services built on artificial intelligence have the potential to improve how hotels and other service businesses interact with customers, a new paper suggests.

How family economic insecurity can hurt child mental health

Economic difficulty caused by the COVID-19 pandemic led to a cascade of connected problems for some parents – resulting in mental health problems for their children, a new study suggests.

Contact: Admissions | Webmaster | Page maintained by University Communications

Request an alternate format of this page | Web Services Status | Nondiscrimination notice

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Fact Sheet: USDA, HHS Announce New Actions to Reduce Impact and Spread of H5N1

Contact: [email protected] | [email protected]

On March 25, 2024, immediately following the first detection of H5N1 in dairy cattle in the Texas panhandle region, USDA and HHS began their work to understand the origin of the emergence and its potential impact in bovines and humans. USDA experts also took swift action to trace animal movements, began sampling to assess the disease prevalence in herds, and initiated a variety of testing activities to confirm the safety of the meat and milk supplies alongside federal partners. On April 1, 2024, Texas reported the first and only confirmed human H5N1 infection associated with this outbreak, after confirmation by CDC. On April 24, 2024, USDA issued a Federal Order, that took effect on April 29, to limit the movement of lactating dairy cattle and to collect and aggregate H5N1 test results to better understand the nature of the outbreak.

Since the detection of H5N1 in dairy cattle, the Federal response has leveraged the latest available scientific data, field epidemiology, and risk assessments to mitigate risks to workers and the general public, to ensure the safety of America’s food supply and to mitigate risk to livestock, owners, and producers. Today, USDA is taking a series of additional steps to help achieve these goals and reduce the impact of H5N1 on affected premises and producers, and HHS is announcing new actions through the CDC and FDA to increase testing and laboratory screening and testing capacity, genomic sequencing, and other interventions to protect the health and safety of dairy and other potentially impacted food items.

Today, USDA is announcing assistance for producers with H5N1 affected premises to improve on-site biosecurity in order to reduce the spread. In addition, USDA is taking steps to make available financial tools for lost milk production in herds affected by H5N1. Building on the Federal Order addressing pre-movement testing, these steps will further equip producers with tools they can use to keep their affected herds and workers healthy and reduce risk of the virus spreading to additional herds.

Protect against the potential for spread between human and animals. Provide financial support (up to $2,000 per affected premises per month) for producers who supply PPE to employees and/or provide outerwear uniform laundering, for producers of affected herds who facilitate the participation of their workers in USDA/CDC workplace and farmworker study.

Complementary to USDA’s new financial support for producers, workers who participate in the study are also eligible for financial incentives to compensate them for their time, regardless of whether the study is led by federal, state, or local public health professionals.

Support producers in biosecurity planning and implementation . Provide support (up to $1,500 per affected premises) to develop biosecurity plans based on existing secure milk supply plans. This includes recommended enhanced biosecurity for individuals that frequently move between dairy farms – milk haulers, veterinarians, feed trucks, AI technicians, etc. In addition, USDA will provide a $100 payment to producers who purchase and use an in-line sampler for their milk system.

Provide funding for heat treatment to dispose of milk in a bio secure fashion. This will provide producers a safe option for disposal of milk. Heat treatment performed in accordance with standards set by FDA is the only currently available method considered to effectively inactivate the virus in milk. If a producer establishes a system to heat treat all waste milk before disposal, USDA will pay the producer up to $2,000 per affected premises per month.

Reimburse producers for veterinarian costs associated with confirmed positive H5N1 premises. This provides support to producers to cover veterinary costs necessarily incurred for treating cattle infected with H5N1, as well as fees for veterinarians to collect samples for testing. This can include veterinary fees and/or specific supplies needed for treatment and sample collection. Veterinary costs are eligible to be covered from the initial date of positive confirmation at NVSL for that farm, up to $10,000 per affected premises.

Offset shipping costs for influenza A testing at laboratories in the National Animal Health Laboratory Network (NAHLN). USDA will pay for the cost of shipping samples to NAHLN labs for testing. USDA will pay actual shipping costs, not to exceed $50 per shipment for up to 2 shipments per month for each affected premises. Testing at NAHLN laboratories for samples associated with this event (e.g., pre-movement, testing of sick/suspect animals, samples from concerned producers) is already being conducted at no-cost to the producer.

Taken together, these tools represent a value of up to $28,000 per premises to support increased biosecurity activities over the next 120 days.

Compensate producers for loss of milk production. USDA is taking steps to make funding available from the Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honey Bees, and Farm-raised Fish Program (ELAP) to compensate eligible producers with positive herds who experience loss of milk production. While dairy cows that have been infected with H5N1 generally recover well, and there is little mortality associated with the disease, it does dramatically limit milk production, causing economic losses for producers with affected premises. USDA can support farmers with the ELAP program to offset some of these losses. This compensation program is distinct from the strategy to contain the spread.

Work with states to limit movement of lactating cattle . Additionally, USDA will work with and support the actions of States with affected herds as they consider movement restrictions within their borders to further limit the spread of H5N1 between herds to reduce further spread of this virus.

USDA will make $98 million in existing funds available to APHIS to fund these initiatives. If needed, USDA has the authority, with Congressional notification, to make additional funds available.

These additional measures build on a suite of actions USDA has taken to date. This includes implementation of the Federal Order to limit spread of the disease, coordinating with federal partners to share expertise and lab capacity, doubling down on our work with producers to practice good biosecurity measures, continuing to conduct investigations to determine how the virus is spread within and between farms, and analyzing and sharing sequences alongside validated epidemiological information.

The U.S. government is addressing this situation with urgency and through a whole-of-government approach. USDA is working closely with federal partners at FDA, which has the primary responsibility for the safety of milk and dairy products, by assisting with conducting lab testing at USDA labs. USDA is also working closely with federal partners at CDC, which has the primary responsibility for public health, by encouraging producer and industry cooperation with public health officials to get vital information necessary to assess the level of risk to human health.

Additional details on how producers can access and apply for the financial tools is forthcoming.

Today, HHS announced new funding investments through CDC and FDA totaling $101 million to mitigate the risk of H5N1 and continue its work to test, prevent, and treat H5N1. Although the CDC’s assessment of the risk of avian influenza infection for the general public continues to remain low at this time, these investments reflect the Department’s commitment to prioritizing the health and safety of the American public.

Public and animal health experts and agencies have been preparing for avian influenza outbreak for 20 years. Our primary responsibility at HHS is to protect public health and the safety of the food supply, which is why we continue to approach the outbreak with urgency. We stood up a response team which includes four HHS agencies – CDC, FDA, NIH and ASPR – which are working closely with USDA to:

Ensure we keep communities healthy, safe, and informed;
Ensure that our Nation’s food supply remains safe;
Safeguard American agriculture and the livelihood and well-being of American farmers and farmworkers; and
Monitor any and all trends to mitigate risk and prevent the spread of H5N1 among both people and animals.

Some examples of this work include:

CDC monitoring of the virus to detect any changes that may increase risk to people, and updated avian flu guidance for workers to ensure people who work with dairy cows and those who work in slaughterhouses have the guides and information they need in both English and Spanish.
CDC's ongoing discussions with multiple states about field investigations and incentives for workers who participate in these on-site studies. CDC has also asked health departments to distribute existing PPE stocks to farm workers, prioritizing those who work with infected cows. To help states comply with CDC recommendations, ASPR has PPE in the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) available for states to request if needed.
FDA’s close coordination with USDA to conduct H5N1 retail milk and dairy sample testing from across the country to ensure the safety of the commercial pasteurized milk supply. NIAID – a part of NIH - is also providing scientific support to this entire effort through six U. S. based Centers for Excellence for Influenza Research and Response, known as CEIRRs.

Today, in light of HHS’ ongoing commitment to ensure the safety of the American people and food supply, HHS announced additional resources to further these efforts through CDC and FDA:

CDC announced it has identified an additional $93 million to support its current response efforts for avian influenza. Building on bipartisan investments in public health, this funding will allow CDC to capitalize on the influenza foundation that has been laid over the last two decades, specifically where CDC has worked domestically and globally to prevent, detect, and respond to avian influenza.

These investments will allow CDC to bolster testing and laboratory capacity, surveillance, genomic sequencing, support jurisdictions and partner efforts to reach high risk populations and initiate a new wastewater surveillance pilot.

Develop and optimize assays that can be used to sequence virus independent of virus identification.
Assess circulating H5N1 viruses for any concerning viral changes, including increased transmissibility or severity in humans or decreasing efficacy of diagnostics or antivirals.
Support the ability of STLT Public Health Labs throughout the country to surge their testing abilities, including support for the additional costs of shipping human avian influenza specimens, which are select agents.
Through the International Reagent Resource (IRR), support manufacture, storage, and distribution of roughly one thousand additional influenza diagnostic test kits (equaling nearly around one million additional tests) for virologic surveillance. The IRR would also provide influenza reagents for research and development activities on a global scale. This is in addition to current influenza testing capacity at CDC and in STLT public health and DOD labs, which is approximately 490,000 H5-specific tests.
Address the manufacturer issue detected with current avian flu test kits.
Initiate avian flu testing in one commercial laboratory.
Scale up existing efforts to monitor people who are exposed to infected birds and poultry to accommodate workers at likely many more poultry facilities, as well as potentially workers at other agricultural facilities and other people (e.g., hunters) who may be exposed to species that pose a threat.
Scale up contact tracing efforts and data reporting to accommodate monitoring of contacts of additional sporadic cases.
Support the collection and characterization of additional clinical specimens through established surveillance systems from regions with large numbers of exposed persons to enhance the ability to detect any unrecognized cases in the community if they occur.
Expand respiratory virus surveillance to capture more samples from persons with acute respiratory illness in different care settings.
Support continuation and possible expansion of existing respiratory surveillance platforms and vaccine effectiveness platforms.
Provide bioinformatics and data analytics support for genomic sequencing at CDC that supports surveillance needs for enhanced monitoring.
Expand sequencing capacity for HPAI in state-level National Influenza Reference Centers (NIRCs), Influenza Sequencing Center (ISC), and Pathogen Genomic Centers of Excellence.
Analyze circulating H5N1 viruses to determine whether current Candidate Vaccine Viruses (CVVs) would be effective and develop new ones if necessary.
Support partner efforts to reach high risk populations.
Initiate wastewater pilot to evaluate the use case for HPAI in up to 10 livestock-adjacent sites in partnership with state and local public health agencies and utility partners.
Implement a study to evaluate the use of Influenza A sequencing in wastewater samples for highly pathogenic avian influenza typing. Initiate laboratory evaluation for HA typing and examine animal-specific markers in community wastewater to assess wildlife and livestock contribution and inform interpretation of wastewater data for action.

Additionally, the FDA is announcing an additional $8 million is being made available to support its ongoing response activities to ensure the safety of the commercial milk supply. This funding will support the agency’s ability to validate pasteurization criteria, conduct surveillance at different points in the milk production system, bolster laboratory capacity and provide needed resources to train staff on biosecurity procedures. Additionally, these funds will help support H5N1 activities in partnership with state co-regulatory partners, who administer state programs as part of the federal/state milk safety system. It may also allow the FDA to partner with universities on critical research questions.

Additional Information:

To learn more about USDA’s response to H5N1 in dairy cattle, visit https://www.aphis.usda.gov/livestock-poultry-disease/avian/avian-influenza/hpai-detections/livestock .

To learn more about CDC’s response to H5N1, visit https://www.cdc.gov/flu/avianflu/mammals.htm .

To learn more about FDA’s response to H5N1, visit https://www.fda.gov/food/alerts-advisories-safety-information/updates-highly-pathogenic-avian-influenza-hpai

Sign Up for Email Updates

Receive the latest updates from the Secretary, Blogs, and News Releases

Subscribe to RSS

Receive latest updates

Related News Releases

Hhs secretary xavier becerra issues statement on the national institutes of health request for information, biden-harris administration reports significant progress toward protecting children from lead poisoning, readout of hhs secretary xavier becerra’s remarks at the sickle cell disease trailblazers event, related blog posts.

Preventing and Addressing Sexual Violence Against People with I/DD

Donate blood and help save lives, the u.s. department of health and human services is taking action to strengthen primary care, media inquiries.

For general media inquiries, please contact [email protected] .

Today's news
Reviews and deals
Climate change
2024 election
Fall allergies
Health news
Mental health
Sexual health
Family health
So mini ways
Unapologetically
Buying guides

Entertainment

How to Watch
My Portfolio
Latest News
Stock Market
Premium News
Biden Economy
EV Deep Dive
Stocks: Most Actives
Stocks: Gainers
Stocks: Losers
Trending Tickers
World Indices
US Treasury Bonds
Top Mutual Funds
Highest Open Interest
Highest Implied Volatility
Stock Comparison
Advanced Charts
Currency Converter
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
Industrials
Real Estate
Mutual Funds
Credit cards
Balance Transfer Cards
Cash-back Cards
Rewards Cards
Travel Cards
Personal Loans
Student Loans
Car Insurance
Morning Brief
Market Domination
Market Domination Overtime
Asking for a Trend
Opening Bid
Stocks in Translation
Lead This Way
Good Buy or Goodbye?
Fantasy football
Pro Pick 'Em
College Pick 'Em
Fantasy baseball
Fantasy hockey
Fantasy basketball
Download the app
Daily fantasy
Scores and schedules
GameChannel
World Baseball Classic
Premier League
CONCACAF League
Champions League
Motorsports
Horse racing
Newsletters

New on Yahoo

Privacy Dashboard

Yahoo Finance

In one north carolina county, it's 'growth, growth, growth.' but will biden reap the benefit, election 2024 biden economy.

SILER CITY, N.C. (AP) — At the epicenter of President Joe Biden’s promised economic boom, a slow tractor can still halt traffic.

Just 81,000 people live in rural Chatham County, North Carolina. There are 1,076 farms. The old mill now houses a dance studio, a grocer and a steakhouse. For work, many people have no choice but to commute to nearby Chapel Hill, Durham and Raleigh.

But after years of careful planning, Chatham County has started to change.

The new Wolfspeed factory — six football fields long — overlooks U.S. Highway 64 and will soon produce advanced wafers for computer chips. Automaker Vinfast is scheduled to open a factory as well. Both projects stem in large part from incentives that Biden signed into law.

Developers, including the Walt Disney Corp. , plan to build several thousand new homes.

“When the right opportunity came along, we were there and we were ready,” said Greg Lewis, who owns the steakhouse. “It is growth, growth, growth.”

That same economic story is being replicated in a number of other critical battleground states, including Arizona and Georgia.

But while the kind of enthusiasm voiced by Lewis would usually mean a strong tailwind for an incumbent president, so far this election year there is little evidence from polling that Americans are giving Biden credit for the gains as voters still focus instead on inflation still climbing at 3.4% annually.

TRUMP AND BIDEN HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS ON A GROWING ECONOMY

Places like Chatham County show how this year’s presidential campaign offers two conflicting visions for America's economic future.

Voters face a decades-defining choice about what can do more for growth: former President Donald Trump's preference for tax cuts skewed toward business and the wealthy or the targeted government investments backed by Biden as well as possible tax increases to fund programs for the middle class.

The county backed Biden over Trump in 2020 but sits in the solidly Republican congressional district of Rep. Richard Hudson. He voted against the Democratic president's policies and his office declined to answer questions about whether the investments in his district are a positive.

Just how much the influx of federal and private sector money affects the political dynamics in North Carolina and beyond will have a lot to say about who will win November's presidential election.

Biden is campaigning on how his policies have helped pump hundreds of billions of dollars in private and federal investment into companies, helping to revive the faded computer chip sector and pioneer newer technologies such as electric vehicles, solar panels and artificial intelligence. But so far, the investments have not significantly swayed the public.

Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee, maintains that Biden’s ideas would wreck the economy and that EVs will flop against a proven fuel such as gasoline. He says corporate tax cuts would do more to bolster growth by letting companies choose their own path, and a threat of higher tariffs would cause them to keep their factory jobs inside the United States.

“Would everybody like to buy an electric car?” Trump asked at a recent rally, where he was met with a chorus of “No!”

When Biden spoke at Wolfspeed’s headquarters in Durham last year, he described its chips as not just powering the economy but protecting it from supply chain disruptions and competition from China.

“It’s a game changer,” he said. “We’re turning things around in a big way.”

MANUFACTURING INVESTMENTS INCREASING

The new Wolfspeed factory has begun installing its industrial furnaces that heat to half of the sun's temperatures. The factory is prepared to start production by the end of the year, while many of the other announced government incentives around the country are still blueprints or in the construction phase.

Pending administration approval, the company may receive support through tax credits from Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act. It also has applied for funding through the Commerce Department as part of the 2022 CHIPS and Science Act.

Wolfspeed CEO Gregg Lowe said the potential for government support has been “very important” as the company has sought to produce more silicon carbide, a material that increases the efficiency of computer chips. He said the material will “lead to one of the most important transitions in the history of semiconductors,” allowing EVs, solar panels, data centers and other technologies such as energy storage to work better.

Even if the company is more focused on its business than electoral politics, the changes in Chatham County go beyond the factory in ways that could matter in November.

People can see the new hotel, the new gasoline stations and the acres of lots set aside for new housing. County Commissioner Karen Howard, a Democrat, said the debate is being forced as Democrats point to what they say is clear evidence they are delivering on their promises. Howard stressed that the gains came as a result of years of county officials' groundwork for sustainable growth that was then complemented by federal policies.

“It feels like Republicans have turned a blind eye to what voters want,” she said. “Tax cuts for the biggest boys in the world never got down to the person who is barely scraping by.”

Howard said the expected total of 1,800 jobs at the Wolfspeed facility will transform households.

“When we say it's making generational change for these families, you now have individuals who will make more than their entire family did in a year,” Howard said.

But Republicans in North Carolina's legislature say investments in the state had more to do with their own policies than the incentives from Biden. GOP lawmakers are making the argument that the impact of inflation during Biden's presidency matters more to voters.

“We’ve lowered taxes, grown the state economy and built the nation’s best workforce," said Phil Berger, president pro tempore of the North Carolina Senate. "Bidenomics here means higher costs for families and businesses, which is what voters will remember when heading to the polls.”

Both Trump and Biden have committed to increasing factory production in the U.S. and making it less reliant on countries such as China. So far, the numbers suggest that Biden’s policies have done more for manufacturing than Trump’s 2017 tax cuts.

Census Bureau figures show that the annualized rate of factory construction spending peaked at $82 billion annually under Trump. As of last March, adjusting for inflation, it has more than doubled under Biden to a record $223 billion. The president has also added more manufacturing jobs than Trump did before the disruptions caused by the 2020 pandemic.

EVEN WITH NEW FACTORY INVESTMENTS, THERE ARE RISKS

But that does not mean Biden’s industrial strategy is a sure thing.

Chatham County records indicate that Vinfast has scaled down the footprint of its EV plant, with the company saying in a statement that it's "currently reviewing the construction of the factory.”

Administration officials say success will require breakthroughs to lower the production costs of advanced computer chips relative to Asia. More drivers will also need to switch to EVs and reverse the recent slowdown in sales.

Some Republicans see room both for some of Biden's policies as well as tax cuts, saying that a mix was the optimal course for success.

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., voted for the CHIPS and Science Act, which funds semiconductor plants. Tillis said after touring Wolfspeed's new factory that the combination of tax breaks and government financial support has been key for attracting new factories.

“At the end of the day, it’s the balance that makes the difference,” he said in an interview outside the factory.

As Wolfspeed's Lowe explained it, the chips produced by the company's factory will help the U.S. to compete against China in the EV, solar panel and artificial intelligence sectors. He happens to drive an EV made by Lucid that contains his own company’s chips, which help give it an impressive range of 516 miles, enough for him to drive to his Ohio hometown with a single charging stop.

The CEO did not speculate about the outcome of the election, but he said technologies such as silicon carbide represent “a monumental change in the history of semiconductors” that is helping to remake the economy.

In short, he sees no going back.

“I tell our people this all the time, you know, in 30 years you’re going to look back to this moment and it’s going to be your mission control, Apollo 13 moment, where you say, ‘I was there when this technology switched.’”

Prediction: Bitcoin Will Reach $1 Million Because of This Little-Known Phenomenon

Action will drive more action.

Distinctive British television is at risk of disappearing, ITV warns

Broadcasters risk being forced to abandon “niche” British TV shows such as Mr Bates vs The Post Office as budgets are squeezed in a production downturn, ITV has warned.

The Fed's favored inflation gauge highlights shortened trading week: What to know this week

The Fed's preferred inflation gauge will test a stock market near record highs in a holiday-shortened trading week.

Ludington Biological Station

Our species.

The work of the Ludington Biological Station focuses on sea lamprey control. Sea lampreys are native to the Atlantic Ocean. In the 1800s, sea lampreys entered into the Great Lakes system via manmade locks and shipping canals. Sea lampreys were first observed in Lake Ontario in the 1830s. Niagara Falls served as a natural barrier preventing sea lampreys from entering the other Great Lakes, but modifications to the Welland Canal in the early 1900s provided sea lampreys a path to invade the other lakes. In 1921 sea lampreys were first observed in Lake Erie and quickly spread into Lakes Michigan, Huron and Superior.

Ludington Biological Station is not traditionally open for public visits or tours but may offer tours and information about sea lamprey research and management in the Great Lakes. We request that you call ahead to set up an appointment with our staff. This will ensure that our staff are prepared to visit with you and your group.

Latest News

Biologists remove adult sea lamprey from a trap on the Manistique River in Michigan

Get Involved

If you’d like to get involved with sea lamprey control, you can find job openings and apply for employment at USAjobs.gov , find volunteer opportunities at volunteer.gov or look for us at outreach events to learn more about what we do.

Location and Contact Information

You are exiting the u.s. fish and wildlife service website.

You are being directed to

We do not guarantee that the websites we link to comply with Section 508 (Accessibility Requirements) of the Rehabilitation Act. Links also do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

IMAGES

Federal research funding up 6 percent in FY2014- All Images
Federal Research and Development: Funding Has Grown since 2012 and Is
Federal Research and Development: Funding Has Grown since 2012 and Is
U.S. Federal Scientific Research and Development: Budget Overview and
The Changing Nature of U.S. Basic Research: Trends in Federal Spending
U.S. Federal Scientific Research and Development: Budget Overview and

VIDEO

Federal Reserve Decision Preview: Watching the Dot Plot
Research Progress Report Presentation Semester October 2023
Research Frontiers Forum 2023: Admiral Jim Stavridis Keynote Address

COMMENTS

FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Actions to
CENDI, an interagency group of 10 federal agencies working to improve productivity of U.S. federal research and development efforts, in partnership with the National Science and Technology Council ...
Federal Research Oversight
Since the 1950s, the federal government has spent an increasing amount of money on R&D, reaching about $179.5 billion in FY 2021. Federal R&D funding has increased since 2012—most recently because of COVID-19 stimulus funding. In FY 2021, over 30 federal agencies supported R&D in the United States. Federal research oversight is needed to ...
New Guidance to Ensure Federally Funded Research Data Equitably
Public access to Federally funded research and data is critical for accelerating discovery, fostering collaboration, advancing equity, ensuring government accountability, and maximizing America ...
PDF 2023 Progress Report on the Implementation of the Federal Science
progress report includes: a summary of CoSTEM progress on the implementation of the current 5-year STEM education strategic plan, a description of the ways federal agencies work together to address
Federal Research and Development R&D Funding: FY2024
Federal Aviation Administration. The President's FY2024 request of $521.7 million for R&D activities and facilities at FAA would be a decrease of 1.8% (-$9.8 million) from the FY2023 enacted amount; the reduction is in the NextGen Research and Development Account, from $90.4 million (FY2023) to $74.9 million (FY2024).
PDF GAO-24-106297, FEDERAL RESEARCH: Key Practices for Scientific Program
Page 1. GAO-24-106297 Federal Research. ongoing awards; and coordinate with funded researchers, other federal officials, and the broader research community to seek synergies and avoid unnecessary duplication of research efforts. Program managers play a vital role in the success of federal R&D.
Redesigning Federal Funding of Research and Development
The financial challenges. Making the necessary changes to combat racial inequity in the current R&D process will not be easy. Federal R&D spending has fallen in recent years, from a high of $168 ...
Appendix C.20 Research In Progress (RIP) Data Base
It is available to the public as part of the Federal Research in Progress (FEDRIP) data base on the DIALOG information system (a commercial system) for a fee. Some records and data elements appropriate only for DOE use are omitted from the FEDRIP version. Hardware/Software: RIP is accessible by any IBM or compatible personal computer or ...
Measuring and Evaluating Federally Funded Research
Also, because the interval between basic research progress and practical outcomes can be decades, the view back must also be long. It should not consist of asking for the practical outcomes of research conducted in the previous year. ... COSEPUP believes that results of federal research programs can be evaluated meaningfully on a regular basis ...
Federal Research in Progress (FEDRIP)
The FEDRIP Database provides access to information about ongoing USA Federally-funded research projects in the fields of physical sciences, engineering and life sciences. Nine government sources of data include: Bureau of Mines, Department of Agriculture, Department of Veterans Affairs, Environment Protection Agency, National Institute of ...
National Technical Information Service Publications and Data
FEDRIP (Federal Research in Progress) database provides bibliography of ongoing federally funded research projects, including NIH, VA, other sources. NTIS provides data files from such agencies as NCHS (health and vital statistics), NCHSR (hospital care, home care, national medical expenditures, HMOs, services to the elderly), and FDA (summary ...
Research in Progress
The objective of the present research is to conduct experimental studies to examine issues related to endorsers in direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug promotion. This study complements one ...
Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR)
There are three types of RPPRs, all of which use the NIH RPPR Instruction Guide. Annual RPPR - Use to describe a grant's scientific progress, identify significant changes, report on personnel, and describe plans for the subsequent budget period or year. Final RPPR - Use as part of the grant closeout process to submit project outcomes in ...
Outlook for Expanding the Federal Research in Progress System
Highlights. In response to a congressional request, GAO conducted a study of the National Technical Information Service's (NTIS) Federal Research In Progress System (FEDRIP) to determine how the information systems of major federal research and development (R&D) agencies related to FEDRIP, and to provide information on how the Japanese and ...
PDF AGENCY: National Science Foundation (NSF)
research sponsored by the Federal government. The Subcommittee used public comments, agency perspectives, and input from a series of ... report progress on research awards, it is difficult to estimate the burden hours associated with . Page 6 of 7 this information collection at this time. Also, because individual components of the proposed
PDF Project Report Frequently Asked Questions For Research Organizations
NSF changed the way project reports are submitted in response to the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) requirement for federal research awards. The RPPR is the result of a government-wide effort to create greater consistency in the administration of federal research awards by streamlining and .
OSTP Issues Guidance to Make Federally Funded Research Freely Available
The new public access guidance was developed with the input of multiple federal agencies over the course of this year, to enable progress on a number of Biden-Harris Administration priorities.
Research
TRB's Research in Progress (RiP) Database now contains more than 11,900 current or recently completed transportation research projects. Most of the RiP records are projects funded by federal and state departments of transportation. University transportation research is also included.
Research and Development: U.S. Trends and International Comparisons
Investment in research and development (R&D) is essential for a country's success in the global economy and for its ability to address challenges and opportunities. R&D contributes to innovation and competitiveness. In 2021, the business sector was the leading performer and funder of U.S. R&D. The federal government was the second-largest overall funding source and the largest funding source ...
Federal Register :: Research Performance Progress Report
On July 23, 2015 the National Science Foundation (NSF) submitted a request for public comment on an Updated Standardized Research Performance Progress Report Format to be used for Both Interim and Final Performance Progress Reporting in the Federal Register [ 80 FR 43802, July 23, 2015]. All comments were carefully considered in developing the ...
PDF FINAL FORMAT RESEARCH PERFORMANCE PROGRESS REPORT Background
RESEARCH PERFORMANCE PROGRESS REPORT Background Effective with publication of this Notice in the Federal Register (Volume 75, Number 8, Pages 1816-1819), agencies will be able to utilize a new uniform format for reporting performance progress on Federally-funded research projects. The Research Performance
Federal Reserve Board
Federal Reserve issues FOMC statement. Recent indicators suggest that economic activity has continued to expand at a solid pace. Job gains have remained strong, and the unemployment rate has remained low. Inflation has eased over the past year but remains elevated. In recent months, there has been a lack of further progress toward the Committee ...
NIMH director discusses progress, opportunities for research during
Earlier this month, the director of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) spent a day at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center to help kick off May's Mental Health Awareness month.This year, the NIMH is celebrating 75 years of providing federal funding for basic and clinical research on mental health disorders.Researchers ac...
PDF GAO-21-130, Federal Research: Agencies Need to Enhance Policies to
GAO was asked to review federal agency and university COI policies and disclosure requirements. In this report, GAO examines (1) COI policies and disclosure requirements at selected agencies and universities that address potential foreign threats, (2) mechanisms to monitor and enforce policies and requirements, and (3) the views of selected ...
Fact Sheet: USDA, HHS Announce New Actions to Reduce Impact and Spread
Additionally, these funds will help support H5N1 activities in partnership with state co-regulatory partners, who administer state programs as part of the federal/state milk safety system. It may also allow the FDA to partner with universities on critical research questions. Additional Information:
PDF Increasing Access to the Results of Federally Funded Research
the-g7-science-ministerial-progress-toward-a-more-open-and-equitable-world/ 3 . just in moments of crisis, but in every moment. ... Federal agency research: Agency public access plans and policies ...
Speech by Governor Waller on the economic outlook
Governor Christopher J. Waller. At the Peterson Institute for International Economics, Washington, D.C. Watch Live. Thank you, Adam, and thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. 1 The Peterson Institute is renowned for its valuable contributions to research and its influence on economic policy. There really is no better place for a ...
In one North Carolina county, it's 'growth, growth, growth.' But will
WOLF. SILER CITY, N.C. (AP) — At the epicenter of President Joe Biden's promised economic boom, a slow tractor can still halt traffic. Just 81,000 people live in rural Chatham County, North ...
Applying Social and Behavioral Science to Federal Policies and Programs
The blueprint includes nearly a hundred examples of how social and behavioral science is already used to make real progress on our highest priorities, including promoting safe, equitable, and ...
Ludington Biological Station
Ludington Biological Station was established in 1956 to support sea lamprey research, monitoring and control efforts. We work with state, tribal and other federal agencies to monitor progress towards fish community objectives for sea lampreys in each of the Great Lakes, but also to develop and implement actions to achieve these objectives. Activities are closely coordinated with state, tribal ...

You are here