Registration rates for the 2016 COSSA Annual Meeting and 2nd Annual Social and Behavioral Science Advocacy Day on March 15-16 will increase on February 15. In addition, the hotel block for out-of-town attendees closes on February 15. Register and make your reservation today! Note: Individuals who work for COSSA member organizations are eligible for a members-only registration rate. Email email@example.com for details on how to get your member discount.
A preliminary agenda for the meeting is now available. Several sessions are still under development—check back soon for a complete listing of speakers and topics.
ABOUT THE COSSA MEETING – The COSSA Annual Meeting brings together representatives from throughout the social and behavioral science community for a day of discussion on federal issues impacting social and behavioral science research. It provides an opportunity for COSSA members to engage directly with leaders of federal science agencies, Congressional staff, and colleagues from other associations and institutions. This year, discussions will highlight the many ways social and behavioral science research serves the national interest. Come be part of the conversation.
COSSA has produced a new resource that shows how U.S. colleges and universities rank in total social and behavioral science research funding awarded each year by the federal government. We use federally collected R&D data for social science-related funding categories to present an accurate listing of the state of social science research funding. Check out how your university stacks up.
Do you enjoy receiving your copy of the COSSA Washington Update and want to do more to promote social and behavioral science research? Become a member of COSSA today! COSSA membership is institutional, meaning once your organization/institution/association joins, anyone at the organization can receive our member benefits, including discounted rates for the COSSA Annual Meeting and Social Science Advocacy Day.
To learn more about what COSSA has to offer, download our list of member benefits. And if you are already a member, check out the list to make sure you are getting the most out of your membership.
COSSA has released new versions of its state-by-state funding fact sheets for federal social and behavioral science funding. The new fact sheets use information for fiscal year (FY) 2014, the most recent currently available federal data. The fact sheets use these data to demonstrate the local economic impact of federal investment in the social and behavioral sciences by providing detailed information on how much funding states receive, where it comes from, and where it goes. They are available for all 50 states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia. Click here to see how much funding your state receives.
COSSA joined organizations representing the “range of scientific, professional, and patient organizations committed to the elimination of substance use disorders and addiction through education, advocacy, and the promotion of broad public and private support for HIV/AIDS and substance use research agendas of the National Institutes of Health [NIH]” on a letter to Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), in response to the fiscal year (FY) 2016 Trans-NIH Plan for HIV-Related Research. The letter expresses concern “that the priorities overall and those specific to behavioral and social sciences, in particular, downplay the critical importance of reducing drug abuse to prevent the spread of HIV infection.” The letter’s signatories “strongly urge the OAR [NIH Office of AIDS Research] to establish a Working Group under the auspices of the OAR Advisory Council to develop guidelines for prevention and treatment of HIV in this ever-growing high-risk population” of individuals with substance use disorders. The NIH released its new HIV/AIDS Research Priorities and Guidelines for Determining AIDS Funding in August 2015 (see Update, December 15, 2015).
The Scientific Research in the National Interest Act (H.R. 3293), sponsored by Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX), is legislation that seeks to set a definition for federally-funded research conducted in the “national interest.” The language of the bill was derived from Sec. 106 of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2015 (H.R. 1806), which passed the House in May despite strong and vocal opposition from the broad scientific research community. Smith has argued that his bill is intended to ensure that the National Science Foundation (NSF) is funding “only high priority research.” While the bill text itself is rather benign, the intent of the legislation, as exemplified by the press release issued alongside it, is to continue singling out grants that Smith deems unworthy of taxpayer support, many in the social sciences. The bill will head to the House floor a vote this week. Companion legislation does not exist in the Senate.
COSSA issued a statement in July calling out the ideological motives behind the bill and urging that political review not become part of NSF’s merit review process.
Last week, the Senate passed the Research Excellence and Advancements for Dyslexia Act or READ Act (H.R. 3033). The bill, originally introduced in the House by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), requires that the National Science Foundation include in its annual budget request to Congress $2.5 million to study the science of dyslexia. An additional $2.5 million is authorized for research on other learning disabilities. The final bill was amended to allow for this flexibility in funding; the original bill earmarked $5 million entirely for dyslexia research. The bill now heads to the President’s desk for signature.
The Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections (SACHRP), the advisory body to the Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary and the Office of Human Research Protections (OHRP), is soliciting nominations to fill four vacancies in 2016, including the position of Chair. SACHRP provides scientific expertise and recommendation on matters related to the protection of human subjects in scientific research. The Committee will likely play an important role as OHRP finalizes its announced revisions to the Common Rule (see COSSA’s coverage). Experts are sought from fields including “public health and medicine, behavioral and social sciences, health administration, and biomedical ethics.” Nominations must be received no later than March 21, 2016. More information is available in the Federal Register notice.
On January 19-20, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research (OBSSR) convened an expert panel to provide input into the Office’s strategic planning process as it works to update the 2007 strategic plan for FY 2016-FY 2020. The meeting follows a series of internal meetings and a November 2015 request for information (RFI) (NOT-OD-16-018) seeking the broad input of the scientific community and the public, including academia, industry, health care professionals, patient advocates and advocacy organizations, scientific and/or professional organizations, and other federal agencies regarding the scientific priorities that should be considered in the update strategic.
In a January 26 blog post, OBSSR Director William Riley noted that he and the OBSSR staff were “energized and encouraged by the passion and urgency” the panel provided and highlighted some of the key messages observed during the meeting. A summary document will be developed based on the meeting discussions followed by a draft strategic plan, which will be made available for public comment. In addition, OBSSR plans to consult with relevant stakeholder groups to solicit feedback through an RFI and develop the proposed final plan to submit for final approval by the NIH director.
The National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) recently released its 16th annual compilation of the research and programs it supports. The report reflects the Institute’s broad research responsibilities. Included among the advances highlighted by director Griffin Rodgers in his introductory message is the finding that “overweight or obese preschoolers participating in Head Start programs were more likely to reach healthier weights by kindergarten age than other groups of overweight and obese children.” The full report is available on NIDDK’s website.