|
Items in cart [1] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 78
6
Management of the Strategic Plan and the
Health Disparities Research Program
T o achieve the Strategic Plan's goals and objectives, activities must be
coordinated among the Institutes and Centers (ICs) and Offices within the
National Institutes of Health (NIH). Effective coordination presents a
major challenge, first because of the research's scope and complexity and second
because of the NIH organizational and functional setting.
THE CHALLENGE OF STRUCTURING A TRANS-NIH HEALTH
DISPARITIES RESEARCH PROGRAM AND STRATEGIC PLAN
Biomedical research on health disparities spans almost every research
discipline and area, as reflected by the participation of almost all NIH ICs in the
Strategic Plan (the National Library of Medicine and the National Center for
Research Resources are not involved). Beyond the research itself, another chal-
lenge is providing adequate attention to the infrastructure and the capacity for
extramural health disparities research, including the enhancement of research
facilities and development of scientists involved in health disparities research.
Finally, communication of research findings and best practices to providers,
the medical education system, patients, and communities represent important
research-to-care translation components.
These biomedical research, research capacity, and communication factors
should be addressed by the programs of the ICs involved in the Strategic Plan.
Indeed, many of these factors were already addressed within the programs of the
78
OCR for page 79
STRATEGIC PLAN AND THE HEALTH DISPARITIES RESEARCH PROGRAM 79
ICs. But the Strategic Plan should have generated a coordinated organization
with more creativity, collaboration, effectiveness, and productivity across the
entire minority health and health disparities program.
NIH's organization and function is a major factor in the success of the
Strategic Plan and the minority health and health disparities research program.
Increases in the number of ICs and their organizational relationships to NIH as an
entity have increased this complexity in recent decades (Committee on the Orga-
nizational Structure of the National Institutes of Health, 2003). Emerging fields
of biomedical information, technology, and research have been accompanied by
a parallel multiplication of medical specialties and academic departments, and
increases in the number of NIH ICs. From 1986 through 2000, 8 new Institutes
and 4 new Centers were established, many as a result of congressional action.
NIH currently includes 19 Institutes, 7 Centers, and the National Library of
Medicine.
The NIH Institutes (Figure 6-1) have been described (McGeary and Smith,
2002) as organized in relation to five categories: diseases (cancer, mental health,
diabetes, digestive and kidney disease, drug and alcohol abuse); organ systems
(heart, lung, and blood; the eye); stage of life (child and human development,
aging); scientific field (general medical sciences, environmental health services,
the human genome); and profession or technology (nursing, dental, imaging,
bioengineering). Some Centers have missions that are supported throughout the
NIH, while others conduct and support intramural and extramural research. Within
the Office of the Director, four Offices have specific coordinating and support
functions: the Office of AIDS Research (OAR), the Office of Research on
Women's Health (ORWH), the Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Re-
search, and the Office of Disease Prevention.
NIH's success and immense contribution to progress in biomedical science
and health care can partly be attributed to: (a) its adaptation to the need for
specialized centers of research capable of focusing highly specialized expertise
and (b) the articulation of the ICs with similar concentrations of science and
scientists in medicine and academia. At the same time, some have been con-
cerned about whether the growth of ICs has been entirely necessary and how
much this proliferation may contribute to increased difficulty in managing NIH
as a cohesive agency. This is particularly germane when NIH addresses an exten-
sive, cross-cutting research endeavor that requires coordination among several
ICs, as well as collaborations with other government agencies.
Although the number of ICs has been the subject of continued analysis--and
even recommendations that there be some consolidation (Committee on the Orga-
nizational Structure of the National Institutes of Health, National Research Coun-
cil, 2003)--there has been even more concern about the organization of the ICs
across NIH and their functional relationships with NIH as an entity. Those relation-
OCR for page 80
80 EXAMINING THE HEALTH DISPARITIES RESEARCH PLAN OF THE NIH
National Institutes of Health
Office of the Director
-- Office of Disease Prevention
-- Office of AIDS Research
-- Office of Research on Women's Health
-- Office of Behavioral & Social Sciences Research
NIH Institutes and Centers
National Cancer National Eye National Heart, Lung, National Human
Institute Institute and Blood Institute Genome Research
Institute
National Institute National Institute on National Institute of National Institute of
on Aging Alcohol Abuse and Allergy and Infectious Arthritis and
Alcoholism Diseases Musculoskeletal and
Skin Diseases
National Institute of National Institute of National Institute on National Institute of
Biomedical Imaging Child Health and Deafness and Other Dental and Craniofacial
and Bioengineering Human Development Communication Research
Disorders
National Institute of National Institute National Institute of National Institute of
Diabetes and Digestive on Drug Abuse Environmental Health General Medical
and Kidney Diseases Sciences Sciences
National Institute of National Institute of National Institute of National Library
Mental Health Neurological Nursing Research of Medicine
Disorders and Stroke
Fogarty National Center for National Center on National Center for
International Complementary and Minority Health and Research Resources
Center Alternative Medicine Health Disparities
Clinical Center for Center for
Center* Information Scientific
Technology* Review*
*These centers do not make research grants.
FIGURE 6-1 Current organization of the National Institutes of Health Institutes and
Centers. SOURCE: Committee on the Organizational Structure of the National Institutes
of Health, 2003.
ships have been described as a loose confederacy of somewhat independent entities
with decentralized control. The ICs have considerable independence and autonomy
with respect to research programs and a lesser degree of independence regarding
budgeting.
Trans-NIH Initiatives
Although much collaborative research is conducted between and among the
ICs, broader NIH-wide initiatives have been organized in a number of ways to
achieve important centralized, trans-NIH organization and coordination. The Com-
OCR for page 81
STRATEGIC PLAN AND THE HEALTH DISPARITIES RESEARCH PROGRAM 81
mittee reviewed examples and experiences as it assessed the organization of the
health disparities research program and the Strategic Plan. Some examples follow.1
OAR. NIH AIDS research, involving several institutes, is overseen by the
OAR, which coordinates scientific, budgetary, legislative, and policy elements of
the NIH AIDS research program. OAR was established in 1988 as an office
within the Office of the NIH Director. Its role and responsibilities were set forth
in P.L. 103-43, the National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act of 1993.
OAR reviews and approves all NIH-conducted and NIH-supported AIDS
research, as well as the related budgets. It also produces a comprehensive trans-
NIH annual strategic plan (the Plan for HIV-Related Research) and evaluates all
AIDS activities of NIH ICs. The Plan for HIV-Related Research is developed
with a consensus on scientific priorities set with the assistance of several plan-
ning groups, including IC directors and staff, researchers from academia and
industry, foundations, community representatives, representatives from other
government agencies, and the OAR Advisory Council. Each involved IC com-
ments on the final plan. The ICs' budgets for AIDS-related research are submit-
ted to OAR and reviewed in relation to the overall Plan for HIV-Related
Research, OAR priorities, and the plans of other ICs. The NIH director and the
OAR determine the overall NIH budgetary allocation for AIDS research, and
the OAR then allocates research budgets to each IC.
As an office within the Office of the Director, OAR does not have grant-
making authority but does exercise control and coordination over all NIH AIDS
research. OAR is responsible for representing, implementing, coordinating, and
monitoring NIH AIDS research. Keys to OAR's ability to coordinate and manage
the trans-NIH AIDS program effectively include clear authority over the budgets
for AIDS research, presence in the Office of the NIH director, and extensive use
of trans-NIH coordinating committees and advisory groups as resources of scien-
tific expertise.
ORWH. The ORWH was established in 1990. Its responsibilities were
described in the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993. While serving to advise the NIH
director on women's health issues, ORWH has a great deal of influence over
NIH research in this area. ORWH does not have budgetary authority over such
research, but it does provide funding to ICs for projects on women's health while
working across NIH to ensure the development of opportunities for women in
biomedical careers and women's health research. ORWH is also responsible for
ensuring the inclusion of women and minorities as subjects in biomedical re-
1 See the following websites for information on trans-NIH research programs at the NIH: http://
www.obesityresearch.nih.gov/about/about.htm, http://nihroadmap.nih.gov/index.asp, http://www4.
od.nih.gov/orwh/, http://www.nih.gov/od/oar/index.htm, http://www.niddk.nih.gov/fund/diabetes
specialfunds/funding.htm, and http://neuroscienceblueprint.nih.gov/.
OCR for page 82
82 EXAMINING THE HEALTH DISPARITIES RESEARCH PLAN OF THE NIH
search including Phase III clinical trials--a role that it manages with great atten-
tion to detail and completeness. ORWH issues comprehensive reports that track
the participation of individuals as subjects in clinical research (U.S. DHHS,
2005). This central function of ORWH has been a factor in its trans-NIH influ-
ence. Reportedly, from its beginning ORWH leadership has been seen as scien-
tifically credible and well integrated into the fabric of NIH activities. Success in
ORWH's trans-NIH roles is attributed to its establishment by legislation, strong
support from the Office of the Director of the NIH, responsibility for a trans-NIH
reporting function, and the scientific credibility of, and respect for, its leadership.
NIH Obesity Research Task Force. The NIH director established the NIH
Obesity Research Task Force in April 2003 "to accelerate progress in obesity
research across NIH." It is co-chaired by the Director of the National Institute of
Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) and the Director of the
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). The Task Force, which
includes representatives from the NIDDK, the NHLBI, and other NIH ICs, was
charged with the development of the Strategic Plan for NIH Obesity Research,
published in August 2004, with the purpose of providing "a guide for coordinat-
ing obesity research activities across NIH and for enhancing the development of
new research efforts based on identification of areas of greatest scientific oppor-
tunity and challenge." The planning process involved contributions from external
experts at scientific and other meetings, interactions with scientific and advocacy
organizations, and review of the draft document by selected individuals.
The Strategic Plan for NIH Obesity Research includes theme areas that are
analogous to the goal areas of the health disparities Strategic Plan. Implementa-
tion of these theme areas will involve interdisciplinary research teams, a focus on
children and racial and ethnic minorities, special attention to translational re-
search, and the dissemination of research results to the public. Beyond develop-
ment of the Strategic Plan for NIH Obesity Research, the Task Force's responsi-
bilities and its involvement in coordination are unclear. The success of this
trans-NIH planning effort reflects its establishment and support by the NIH direc-
tor, the leadership of the Task Force, the effective involvement of the ICs, and the
extensive involvement of experts from NIH and from the extramural scientific
community.
NIH Neuroscience Blueprint. The NIH Neuroscience Blueprint, an-
nounced in October 2004, is a new interagency partnership intended to rein-
force ongoing NIH efforts to increase collaborative research and information
sharing among 14 ICs that conduct or support research on the brain and
nervous system. The ICs will carry out independent research but collaborate
and share resources on research challenges and training that can be addressed
collectively. The Neuroscience Blueprint builds on an existing cooperative
relationship established through initiatives and working groups on specific
OCR for page 83
STRATEGIC PLAN AND THE HEALTH DISPARITIES RESEARCH PROGRAM 83
disorders. It will target neuroscience challenges that will benefit from a col-
laborative approach beginning with three unifying themes: development of
the nervous system throughout the life span, neurodegeneration from disease
and aging, and nervous system plasticity (changes in response to the environ-
ment, experience, injury, and disease). How the Neuroscience Blueprint will
be managed and coordinated is not specified.
Two additional trans-NIH initiatives instituted by the director of NIH are
aimed at facilitating cohesive, integrated NIH core efforts: the NIH Roadmap and
the Office of Portfolio Analysis and Strategic Initiatives (OPASI).
NIH Roadmap. The NIH Roadmap is an initiative spearheaded by the direc-
tor of NIH with the purpose of identifying major opportunities and gaps in bio-
medical research, in order to enhance the progress of medical research. Develop-
ment of the Roadmap involved broad consultation with representatives of the
scientific community and public constituencies and the extensive participation of
NIH working groups, the NIH Council of Public Representatives, and the Advi-
sory Committee to the Director.
From 2004 to 2005, the first Roadmap initiatives were begun. They reflect
the themes of: (a) New Pathways, which seeks to advance understanding of
biological systems; (b) Research Teams of the Future, which explores new orga-
nizational models for team sciences; and (c) Re-engineering the Clinical Re-
search Enterprise, which will develop new approaches to discovery and clinical
validation of research results. The Roadmap, initiated and guided by the director
of the NIH, forms the basis for the overarching planning of NIH's strategies for
research for the coming years.
OPASI. In FY 2006, the NIH plans to create a new office within the Office
of the Director, OPASI, which is intended to provide tools to facilitate the plan-
ning and management of trans-NIH initiatives, including an improved process for
collecting IC data on expenditures on various diseases, conditions, and research
fields, and improvements in data about the burden of disease. OPASI will also
develop, with input from the ICs, common processes and formats, where neces-
sary, for the conduct of NIH-wide planning and evaluation. For its trans-NIH
planning efforts, OPASI will seek broad public input--from the public, health
care providers, policy makers, and scientists--in addition to soliciting advice
from within the NIH. The office will also coordinate and make more effective use
of the NIH-wide evaluation process (Kington, 2005). The ultimate structure,
responsibilities, and authorities of OPASI with respect to the trans-NIH initia-
tives are not yet clear, but OPASI could exert far-reaching effects on the manage-
ment and coordination of the minority health and health disparities program and
the Strategic Plan.
The Committee's review of trans-NIH programs and efforts noted that ap-
OCR for page 84
84 EXAMINING THE HEALTH DISPARITIES RESEARCH PLAN OF THE NIH
parent success of trans-NIH coordination and management is related to several
factors, including:
· Legislative authority
· Budget authority
· A clear science agenda/focus
· Clear support from the director of the NIH
· Responsibility and accountability within ICs
· Strong, structured articulation of ICs with a central coordinating entity,
including trans-NIH committees and other groups led by the coordinating entity
COORDINATION OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN AND MINORITY
HEALTH AND HEALTH DISPARITIES RESEARCH
It could be said that there is no trans-NIH research effort more challenging
than the health disparities research program and its Strategic Plan. Although most
similar, the AIDS research program differs in scope because it is developed
around a single disease, complicated and challenging as it is. By contrast, the
minority health and health disparities research includes a broader scope of dis-
eases and conditions.
Coordination of the minority health and health disparities program and the
Strategic Plan across NIH should address needs for:
· Concerted involvement of ICs and Offices in the development of the
Strategic Plan, including continuous review and annual updates, which are a
collective result of experiences, assessments, new inclusions, and other changes.
· Ensuring that all ICs and pertinent offices are attentive to the mission,
goals, and objectives of the Strategic Plan.
· Avoiding gaps, such as populations, conditions, needs, and approaches,
that would otherwise not be identified and addressed by the independent opera-
tion of the ICs.
· Bringing the best expertise from across NIH and from the external scien-
tific community as a resource for the program and for strategic planning.
· Avoiding duplication of administrative and research efforts.
· Facilitating collaborative and coordinated approaches to minority and
health disparity research areas that affect and involve more that one institute or
center.
· Coordinating approaches to those aspects of outreach and communication
that, rather than being addressed individually by the ICs, would benefit from
collectively planned and coordinated trans-NIH efforts, including evaluations of
project results and identification and further trials of promising methods.
· Creating an NIH coordination structure and mechanism that will articu-
late with other government agencies (e.g., the Centers for Disease Control and
OCR for page 85
STRATEGIC PLAN AND THE HEALTH DISPARITIES RESEARCH PROGRAM 85
Prevention, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the Department of
Health and Human Services) on minority health and health disparities, particu-
larly with respect to the relation between research on disparities in health status
and disparities in access to health care and its quality.
· Monitoring such a broad NIH activity. This includes avoiding duplication
of efforts and use of resources, ensuring that funds committed in Strategic Plans
are expended as described, and regularly assessing progress and outcomes.
· Addressing research and budget priorities.
Particularly important is recognizing, and attending to, the interface between
fundamental priorities. IC programs and budgets are the products of commit-
ments, mandates, and priorities resulting from presentations and requests to, and
authorizations from, Congress. If there is truly a concerted trans-NIH priority for
minority health and health disparities research, that prioritization should be de-
monstrably active in the program priority decisions of the ICs.
The Committee saw little evidence of integration, coordination, or monitor-
ing of health disparities research and the Strategic Plan across NIH. Several
observations, as detailed below, led to this conclusion.
Review and revision of the Strategic Plan does not involve the coordinated,
concerted, and collective participation of the ICs. There is no ongoing, continu-
ous update process with an established trans-NIH structure involving ICs and
others that produces planning improvements and results in periodic, meaningful
updates and revisions of the Strategic Plan. There is no evidence of trans-NIH
planning of priorities regarding minority health and health disparities research
activities and resources for the NIH as a whole or with respect to the ICs. In
discussions with the Committee, directors and other leading members of several
large ICs with extensive minority health and health disparities programs ex-
pressed a very high level of commitment to and enthusiasm for these activities.
However, it was evident that there had been little to no contact with the National
Center for Minority Health and Health Disparities (NCMHD) during the develop-
ment or implementation of the projects and programs. Activities and programs
were pursued independently of NCMHD, except that some, particularly in the
past, had been co-funded or totally funded by NCMHD.
There is no manifest organizational structure for the trans-NIH Strategic
Plan and health disparities program. Advisory and coordinating committees are
not described or apparent. Experts from scientific, health care, and affected com-
munities are not involved in advising and participating in ongoing planning in
established, structured, predictable ways. Thus, there is a great loss of opportu-
nity to properly inform and contribute to the identification of research and related
needs, planning, and strategizing.
No results summarizing the monitoring and assessment of minority health
and health disparities research and related activities for NIH or the ICs are evi-
dent. Annual reports are late, languish incomplete and unapproved, and do not
OCR for page 86
86 EXAMINING THE HEALTH DISPARITIES RESEARCH PLAN OF THE NIH
contain evidence of central NIH assessments of research and program activities.
Moreover, budget and finance issues are not addressed by a centralized entity
responsible for the minority health and health disparities research program and
the Strategic Plan.
Recognizing this need for leadership and management, the Committee found
it difficult to be certain of an established, clear responsibility and authority for
coordinating and monitoring the Strategic Plan and health disparities research.
The enabling legislation, P.L. 106-525, expects NCMHD to have and to be in-
volved with such responsibilities, as indicated in Section 485E(e):
The director of the Center shall act as the primary Federal official with respon-
sibility for coordinating all minority health disparities research and other health
disparities research conducted or supported by the National Institutes of Health.
Also, Section 485E(f) indicates that "the Director of NIH, the Director of the
Center, and the directors of the other agencies of the National Institutes of Health
in collaboration (and in consultation with the advisory council for the Center)"
together are responsible for establishing the Strategic Plan and budget and re-
viewing its progress. These responsibilities include ensuring that the Strategic
Plan and budget establish priorities, verifying that the amounts appropriated are
expended in accord with the Strategic Plan and budget, and reviewing and revis-
ing the Strategic Plan and budget annually.
These monitoring responsibilities are described in the legislation as the joint
responsibilities of the director of NIH, the director of NCMHD, and the directors
of the ICs. To avoid misunderstanding of the authority to manage and monitor the
program across NIH, it is important to clarify how such an arrangement of re-
sponsibilities is achieved in practice. That is, it must be made clear whether
specific authority is delegated to the director of NCMHD by the director of NIH
and understood to exist by the directors of the ICs--or, alternatively, whether
there are truly joint responsibilities and operational authorities (a situation that
would be confusing). When the Committee requested clarification, it was told by
the NIH director that the responsibilities and authority were shared between the
director of NIH and the director of NCMHD. Moreover, reviews and discussions
with leaders and representatives of the ICs and Offices within the Office of the
Director suggested that the responsibilities and authorities were not uniformly
clear. This situation differs from other trans-NIH initiatives.
The Executive Summaries of the 2002 Strategic Plan and the 2004 draft
indicate the following: "Within the NIH, the National Center on Minority Health
and Health Disparities (NCMHD) serves as the focal point for planning and
coordinating minority health and other health disparities research." Also, in the
approved Strategic Plan for 20022006 and the draft of the 20042008 Strategic
Plan, NCMHD's responsibility for establishing and updating the Strategic Plan
and budget and coordinating health disparities research is set forth. This is appro-
OCR for page 87
STRATEGIC PLAN AND THE HEALTH DISPARITIES RESEARCH PROGRAM 87
priate and in accord with the legislation. However, whether NCMHD's authority
is understood and acted upon throughout NIH is unclear.
Finding: The level of trans-NIH coordination needed to effectively imple-
ment the Strategic Plan has not been evident. Instead, the Committee
concluded that an uncoordinated, unmonitored, loosely administered
trans-NIH program existed, with substantial commitments and activi-
ties of largely independent ICs, but without the coordinated, concerted
program needed. Clarity regarding the responsibilities and authority
may be a factor in achieving more effective management. The mandates
of the NIH director are key elements in structuring and assuring effec-
tive management.
Recommendation 10: The NIH director, through the established author-
ity of the NCMHD director, should ensure continuous, effective coordi-
nation of the health disparities research program across NIH, including:
· Timely development of Strategic Plan revisions;
· Effective, ongoing participation of the ICs in the Strategic Plan
and the health disparities research program;
· Establishment of appropriate committees involving the directors of
the ICs and others to facilitate collaboration and coordinated ap-
proaches to health disparities research and the setting of priorities;
· Fostering of conferences and the use of committees and panels
involving the NIH, extramural scientific communities, and others
to inform and advise on initiatives and directions; and
· Monitoring of the execution of the Strategic Plan to ensure that its
elements are implemented.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
disparities research
