The National Institutes of Health has removed a notice aimed at encouraging grant proposals from minority scientists from three separate institutes.
Jer123/Shutterstock
In a move sparking criticism from the Twitterverse, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has removed a notice to encourage grant proposals from minority scientists from three separate institutes.
The notice, which was initially posted in May by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and followed by two other institutes, encouraged applicants from groups underrepresented in the sciences to fill out a box when applying for funding. This move was intended to include minority groups and researchers from disadvantaged backgrounds. Then, if the proposal was well-received in review but just missed the funding cutoff, funding could still be recommended if it was believed that the applicant’s diverse background appeared to strengthen the science.
The original notice stated that “as the US population becomes increasingly diverse, reflection of that diversity among the biomedical research workforce is vital to our science enterprise and the NIH research mission.” One group of individuals who could apply were those from racial and ethnic groups including African Americans, Hispanics or Latinos, American Indians or Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, and other Pacific Islanders. The second and third groups included those at a disadvantage due to physical and mental disabilities, current homelessness, or previous status as a foster child.
The NIH’s Office of Extramural Research (OER), however, said the notice was “confusing” and added that institutes already had the leeway to fund “outside the payline” to “bring in diverse scientific perspectives.” Thus, it barred other individual institutes from joining the group of posters. Upon removing the notices, an OER spokesperson further stated that the decision had been made “for clarity in communications.”
On October 25, the NIH rescinded the notice and referred prospective applications to a statement, which encourages underrepresented groups to apply but does not give an option for these researchers to tag their applications.
“We decided that issuing a general notice that encompassed all NIH better communicated our intent,” said the same spokesperson.
Some, including Michael Taffe, a drug abuse researcher at the University of California, San Diego and Jessamy Bagenal, an editor at the Lancet and NHS-trained surgeon, have objected on social media.
“This seems a shame. Unclear what the reason is for pulling the initiative,” tweeted Bagenal.
“[ICs] already ... fund some grants that miss the cutoff in order to bolster overlooked or high-priority research areas, and they can use the same ‘select pay’ option to encourage ‘diverse perspectives,’ insisted Taffe.
In a statement to ScienceInsider, Taffe wondered how program officers would now be able to tell whether an applicant had been a foster child or from a minority group, with no mechanism in place for such self-identification.
The Notice of NIH’s Interest in Diversity states in part, “In spite of tremendous advancements in scientific research, information, educational and research opportunities are not equally available to all. NIH encourages institutions to diversify their student and faculty populations to enhance the participation of individuals from groups that are underrepresented in the biomedical, clinical, behavioral and social sciences …”
Featured Jobs on BioSpace
