MAJOR INSTRUMENTATION FUNDING IN THE U.S.

As part of ABRF's commitment towards increasing awareness of the inadequate level of funding of the NIH Shared Instrumentation Grant (SIG) Program, which is administered by the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), we ask our U.S. members to write to both the NCRR and to Congress to urge that the level of SIG funding be significantly increased to a level that is closer to the more than $30 million annual budget that existed from 1985 to 1991. As a result of the disastrous 75% reduction in SIG funding that occurred in 1992, only 39 grants were funded in 1992 as compared to the 171 grants that were funded in 1985. Unfortunately, final 1993 funding , which was just under $8.8 million, remained at the same level as 1992 (see the March, 1993 ABRF News).

Some of the arguments that can be made in support of increased SIG funding are:

1. The current level of funding is insufficient to even continue to replace outmoded instrumentation in the approximately 150 ABRF core facilities that are located in academic and research institutions in the U.S., let alone enable most of these units to provide their users with new and evolving technologies such as automated DNA sequencing, laser desorption mass spectrometry and multiple peptide synthesis.
2. The mechanism for maximizing the benefit of SIG funds has never been better than that afforded by core facilities - most of which have been in existence for less than 7 years (FASEB J. 7, 1109-1114 (1993)).
3. Since many biotechnology core facilities serve 50-100 or more principal investigators and since at many universities, 40-50% of the NIH-funded investigators use these facilities, it is not an exaggeration to state that these units provide the basic underpinning that supports much of our nation's biomedical research effort. Yet, the SIG budget represents less than 0.1% of the $11 billion 1994 NIH budget.

Letters may be sent to Dr. Judith Vaidukaitis, Director of the NCRR, NIH, Build. 12A, Room 4009, Bethesda, MD, 20892 and to any Congressional Appropriations members from your state. Letters to members of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, HHS, and Education should be addressed to: The Honorable (Representative's name), U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. 20515. Letters to members of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, HHS, and Education should be addressed to: The Honorable (Senator's name), U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510.

HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE ON LABOR, HHS, AND EDUCATION

• Nancy Pelosi, D-CA
• Rosa DeLauro, D-CT
• C. W. Bill Young, R-FL
• John E. Porter, R-IL
• Neal Smith, D-IA (Acting Chair)
• Helen D.Bentley, R-MD
• Steny H. Hoyer, D-MD
• Nita M. Lowey, D-NY
• Jose Serrano, D-NY
• Louis Stokes, D-OH
• Henry Bonilla, R-TX
• David R.Obey, D-WI

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE ON LABOR, HHS, AND EDUCATION

• Dale Bumpers, D-AZ
• Ted Stevens, R-AK
• Connie Mack, R-FL
• Daniel K. Inouye, D-HI
• Tom Harkin, D-IA (Chair)
• Thad Cochran, R-MS
• Christopher S. Bond, R-MO
• Harry Reid, D-NV
• Mark O. Hatfield, R-OR
• Arlen Specter, R-PA
• Ernest F. Hollings, D-SC
• Slade Gorton, R-WA
• Patty Murray, D-WA
• Robert C. Byrd, D-WV
• Herbert H. Kohl, D-WI

Finally, the following is the text of a letter, regarding the Shared Instrumentation Grant program, sent to Dr. Harold Varmus, Director of the NIH, and Dr. Judith Vaitukaitis, Director of the NCRR, by Senator Tom Harkin and Congressman Edward Porter. Although any improvement in instrumentation funding is still an uncertainty, it is encouraging that the message seems to be getting through to some members of Congress.

December 23, 1993

Dear Dr.

We are concerned about the 75% reduction in funding for the Shared Instrumentation Grant (SIG) program at the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR) beginning in 1992. We understand that the SIG program is the only source of funding for research equipment purchases in the range of $100,000 to $400,000 -- those that are too costly to fund through R01 grants. The SIG program helps purchase items such as confocal microscopes, electron microscopes, mass spectrometers, and nucleic acid sequencers and synthesizers. In addition, it enables researchers to purchase new state-of-the-art equipment, upgrade existing equipment, and develop the next generation of instruments to study cells at the molecular level. Because all equipment purchased under this program is shared among researchers, the SIG program is extremely cost effective.

Unfortunately, instrumentation costs are increasing at a time when federal resources are declining. We understood that the initial reduction in SIG funding would be a one-time event, but we are concerned that three consecutive years of reduced funding will severely affect important research efforts. A recent NCRR Strategic Planning Workshop confirmed our concerns.

We support increased funding for the SIG program to provide researchers with the scientific tools necessary to conduct important NIH-sponsored research. We ask that you be prepared to testify regarding this program during the hearings on the FY95 budget for NIH later this year. Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter.

John Edward Porter, M.C Tom Harkin, U.S.S.

Return to the The ABRF Home Page