WASHINGTON -- A new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine calls for a series of substantial reforms to strengthen the U.S. biomedical research system for the next generation of scientists.  The congressionally requested report includes recommendations to open career paths inside and outside of academia for early career scientists, broaden responsibility among public and private stakeholders for the future of the research ecosystem, and increase policy experimentation and investment in that research ecosystem, so that scientists are empowered to imagine new and innovative treatments for diseases and improvements to health and well-being. The report also identifies barriers that have impeded past efforts at reform of the biomedical research ecosystem, and proposes means to overcome those obstacles. 

The report recommends making available better data on career paths inside and outside of universities. It urges Congress to establish a public-private partnership to promote collective and sustained stewardship of the biomedical research enterprise, and to consider increasing the budget of the National Institutes of Health to enable it to more robustly support early career researchers. The report recommends the creation of more research scientist jobs at universities and research institutes – jobs that would be permanent but non-faculty positions, would provide reasonable salaries and benefits, and would offer an additional career pathway and off-ramp from today’s temporary and low-paid postdoctoral fellowships. In addition, after conducting pilot studies to assess the impacts of the policy, NIH should phase in a cap on the number of years of support that postdoctoral researchers can receive from NIH research project grants. 

The report responds to many years of warning signs that the U.S. biomedical enterprise may be calcifying in ways that create barriers for the incoming generation of researchers. One of the biggest challenges is the gulf between the growing number of young scientists who are qualified for and interested in becoming academic researchers and the limited number of tenure-track research positions available. Many new Ph.D.s spend long periods in postdoctoral positions with low salaries, inadequate training, and little opportunity for independent research. Many postdocs pursue training experiences expecting that they will later secure an academic position, rather than pursuing a training experience that helps them compete for the range of independent careers available outside of academia, where the majority will be employed. As of 2016, for those researchers who do transition into independent research positions, the average age for securing their first major NIH independent grant is 43 years old, compared to 36 years old in 1980.

The reports notes that multiple national reports have already considered these problems and proposed countless reforms, many of which have gone unaddressed. Leaving these problems unresolved could affect the nation’s ability to recruit the best minds to pursue careers in biomedical research.

“As we surveyed the biomedical research landscape, we saw remarkable achievement and promise, but also areas of stress and vulnerability,” said Ron Daniels, chair of the committee that wrote the report and president of the Johns Hopkins University.  “Our recommendations seek to respond to those vulnerabilities, and put in place the structures and conditions for sustained change – so that the need for episodic reports starts to fall away, replaced instead by ongoing, enduring policy change across the enterprise.”

Barriers that have impeded prior reform efforts so far include a lack of shared guardianship between the federal government and research institutions, constrained funding for NIH, and a lack of data on the career outcomes of young researchers, which has prevented students and trainees from making informed decisions about their career options. The report offers a series of recommendations to Congress, the National Institutes of Health, and research institutions to overcome these barriers and create the conditions for sustained change.

The report recommends that Congress:

• Establish a Biomedical Research Enterprise Council (BREC) -- a public-private partnership of stakeholders to provide collective guardianship of the biomedical research enterprise and address ongoing challenges confronting the next generation of biomedical and behavioral researchers. BREC would function as a forum for sustained coordination, problem-solving, and assessment of progress toward implementation of the recommendations in the report. It would help ensure that all institutions in the biomedical research system, including universities, play a shared role in developing and implementing solutions, rather than looking to NIH as the responsible party.
• Consider increasing NIH’s budget to help implement the recommendations in the report and to provide sustained support for NIH’s recently announced Next Generation Researchers Initiative.
• Work with NIH to promote innovative pilot projects on the part of research institutions and other stakeholders that seek to improve and accelerate transitions into independent careers.

Among the report’s recommendations to NIH:

• Expand existing awards or create new competitive awards for postdoctoral researchers to advance their own independent research and support professional development toward an independent research career. By July 1, 2023, there should be a fivefold increase in the number of individual research fellowship awards and career development awards for postdoctoral researchers granted by NIH.
• Ensure that the duration of all R01 research grants supporting early-stage investigators is no less than five years to enable the establishment of resilient independent research programs.
• Phase in a cap – three years suggested – on salary support for all postdoctoral researchers funded by NIH research project grants (RPGs). The phase-in should occur only after NIH undertakes a robust pilot study of sufficient size and duration to assess the feasibility of this policy and provide opportunities to revise it. The pilot study should be coupled to action on the previous recommendation for an increase in individual awards.

The report’s recommendations for research institutions include:

• Collect, analyze, and disseminate comprehensive data on outcomes, demographics, and career aspirations of biomedical and behavioral science pre- and postdoctoral researchers, using common standards and definitions. To incentivize compliance, NIH should require the collection and publication of these data for institutions to qualify for further NIH funding. This requirement should be phased in over a five-year transition period.
• Introduce a mechanism to facilitate career guidance counseling for all postdoctoral researchers. This mechanism would preferably begin in the first year, but must occur no later than the third year of postdoctoral training. Such guidance should assess the postdoctoral researcher’s progress and evaluate alignment between their career aspirations and career prospects.
• Provide evidence to NIH of formal training of faculty mentors of postdoctoral trainees.
• To promote diversity and inclusion of research trainees, principal investigators should provide a diversity and inclusion plan for their grant proposals and provide updates in progress reports.
• Work with the National Institutes of Health to increase the number of individuals in staff scientist positions to provide more stable, non-faculty research opportunities for the next generation of researchers. Individuals on a staff scientist track should receive a salary and benefits commensurate with their experience and responsibilities.

The Academies’ study was sponsored by the U.S. National Institutes of Health and the Bloomberg Philanthropies. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are private, nonprofit institutions that provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions related to science, technology, and medicine. They operate under an 1863 congressional charter to the National Academy of Sciences, signed by President Lincoln.

Contacts: 
Sara Frueh, Media Relations Officer
Andrew Robinson, Media Relations Assistant
Office of News and Public Information
202-334-2138; e-mail news@nas.edu
Follow us:

Twitter @theNASEM 
Instagram @thenasem
Facebook @NationalAcademies

Copies of The Next Generation of Biomedical and Behavioral Sciences Researchers: Breaking Through are available at www.nap.edu or by calling 202-334-3313  or 1-800-624-6242. Reporters may obtain a copy from the Office of News and Public Information (contacts listed above).

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES OF SCIENCES, ENGINEERING, AND MEDICINE

Policy and Global Affairs Division
Board on Higher Education and the Workforce

Committee on the Next Generation Initiative

Ronald J. Daniels (chair)
President
Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore

Nancy C. Andrews^{1, 2}
Nanaline H. Duke Professor of Pediatrics, and
Professor of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology
Duke University School of Medicine
Durham, N.C.

W. Travis Berggren
Founding Director
Stem Cell Research Core Facility
Salk Institute for Biological Studies
La Jolla, Calif.

Sue Biggins¹
Investigator
Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and
Associate Director, Basic Sciences Division
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
Seattle

John C. Boothroyd¹
Associate Vice Provost for Graduate Education, and
Burt and Marion Avery Professor of Immunology
Department of Microbiology and Immunology
Stanford University School of Medicine
Stanford, Calif.

David R. Burgess
Professor
Department of Biology
Boston College
Boston

Kafui Dzirasa
Assistant Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences
Duke Institute for Brain Sciences
Duke University
Durham, N.C.

Giovanna Guerrero-Medina
Executive Director
Ciencia Puerto Rico, and
Director
Yale Ciencia Initiative
Yale University
New Haven, Conn.

Judith Kimble¹
Investigator
Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and
Vilas Professor
Department of Biochemistry
University of Wisconsin
Madison

Story C. Landis²
Scientist Emeritus and Former Director
National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke
Bethesda, Md.

Kenneth Maynard
Head
Global Patient Safety Evaluation Compliance, Standards and Training, and Business Partners Relations
Takeda Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Deerfield, Ill.

Gary S. McDowell
Executive Director
The Future of Research Inc., and
Resident
Manylabs
San Francisco

Jessica Polka
Visiting Postdoctoral Research Fellow
Department of Systems Biology
Harvard Medical School, and
Visiting Scholar
Whitehead Institute
Boston

Joan Y. Reede²
Dean for Diversity and Community Partnership, and
Professor of Medicine
Harvard Medical School
Boston

Lana R. Skirboll
Vice President of Science Policy
Sanofi
Washington, D.C.

Paula E. Stephan
Professor of Economics
Georgia State University, and
Research Associate
National Bureau of Economic Research
Atlanta

Maria Elena Zavala
Professor
Department of Biology
California State University
Northridge

STAFF

Lida Beninson
Staff Officer

¹Member, National Academy of Sciences
²Member, National Academy of Medicine