Assignments following my original NIDR experience were equally informative and fun for me as I continued to tour the NIH and other federal agencies. One effort was with the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) which provided extramural funds for basic biological and biochemical studies fundamental for all living conditions. Here my focus was on the method of support for the training of pre- and postdoctoral students through fellowships and training grants. The NIGMS also awarded grants for research, per se.
My research grant management exposure was obtained through an experience with the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HICHD), an agency resulting from an interest by the family of John F. Kennedy. New Institutes were constantly being formed or renamed depending upon current political conditions. Some referred to these changes being the result of the “disease-of-the-month club.” However, the re-designation of an Institute, or an increase in the funding for an existing one, normally required that the “fad” exist through a federal budget cycle or two before the result to become final.
In addition to exposures within the Institutes, I also had an assignment with the Division of Research Grants. The DRG interacted with all of the Institutes, since it was the centralized organization for the peer review of all requests for funding by the NIH. Here were the “study sections” headed by chiefs who were administratively in charge of each review group, composed of outside consultants from academic and research centers throughout the nation. Three or four times a year, each group, consisting of ten to twenty members, gathered in Bethesda to review all applications coming from those seeking support through research grants, fellowships, training grant programs or large “program projects,” which incorporated funds for both research and training in a specified area.
The members of each review group (study section) would have read the applications prior to attendance at their meeting, where they would, after further discussions, vote a “priority score” as an assessment of the merit of the request being made. Applications with voted scores between 100 and 200 – with 500 being the poorest, yet approved, score – might be funded by one of the Institutes for which the reviews were made. The final decision to support an approved application depended upon the budget for each Institute, to which the grant proposal had been assigned by the DRG. During the period of tight budgets allocated to the NIH by Congress, awards might be limited to those with scores between 100 and 150. Only those requests with the very best priority scores were ever funded.
In addition to internship assignments with the Institutes and the DRG, I also had an opportunity to observe events involving overall policies of the NIH. At that time, Dr. John Sherman, who was a legendary director for the NIH extramural programs, requested that I draft serval documents for his consideration while I was assigned to “Building One” of the NIH.
My month-long assignment to the Office of the Secretary of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare offered me a different kind of opportunity. Since the DHEW was in downtown Washington, D.C. I had time, during my lunch periods, to visit sites of interest around The Mall. This was an era when the Capitol was open to all citizens. If a person looked like he belonged, it was possible to roam the halls of Congress without any security badge or other approval. I had learned the technique of walking-rapidly-with-purpose and saw a lot of new territory that now would be completely “off-limits” due to new terrorists. What a difference can be made by the exchange of a few letters like “– itory” and “– orist!” when appended to the basic: terri/terro!