Setting priorities for publicly funded research PDF Download
Are you looking for read ebook online? Search for your book and save it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Download Setting priorities for publicly funded research PDF full book. Access full book title Setting priorities for publicly funded research by Great Britain: Parliament: House of Lords: Science and Technology Committee. Download full books in PDF and EPUB format.
Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Lords: Science and Technology Committee
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 9780108472404
Category : Political Science
Languages : en
Pages : 520
Get Book
Book Description
In its report into how priorities are set for publicly funded research, the Science and Technology Committee calls on the Government to make a clear and unambiguous statement setting out their research funding commitments and the periods of time over which those commitments apply.
Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Lords: Science and Technology Committee
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 9780108472404
Category : Political Science
Languages : en
Pages : 520
Get Book
Book Description
In its report into how priorities are set for publicly funded research, the Science and Technology Committee calls on the Government to make a clear and unambiguous statement setting out their research funding commitments and the periods of time over which those commitments apply.
Author: Institute of Medicine
Publisher: National Academies Press
ISBN: 030906130X
Category : Medical
Languages : en
Pages : 136
Get Book
Book Description
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the single largest funder of health research in the United States, and research it has supported has been pivotal to the explosion of biomedical knowledge over the past century. As NIH's success has grown, so has pressure from advocacy groups and other members of the public to devote more spending to their health concerns. In response to a request from Congress, this IOM study reviewed NIH's research priority-setting process and made recommendations for possible improvement. The committee considered the: Factors and criteria used by NIH to make funding allocations. Process by which the funding decisions are made. Mechanisms for public input. Impact of congressional statutory directives on funding decisions. Among other recommendations, the book recommends that NIH seek broader public input on decisions about how to spend its nearly $14 billion budget; it also urged the agency to create new Offices of Public Liaison in the Office of the Director and in each of the 21 research institutes to allow interested people to formally take part in the process.
Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Lords. Science and Technology Committee
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 9780108472329
Category : Business & Economics
Languages : en
Pages : 60
Get Book
Book Description
In its report into how priorities are set for publicly funded research, the Science and Technology Committee calls on the Government to make a clear and unambiguous statement setting out their current research funding commitments and the periods of time over which those commitments will apply. Decisions about funding priorities are complex and require careful judgement about the deployment of funds between competing priorities. The Committee concludes that, in the current policy framework, there is a lack of oversight of the total spend on research which is needed to enable the Government to make coherent, well-founded decisions about the use of public funds to support research. The Committee recommends that: the Government Chief Scientific Adviser (GCSA) should publish figures annually, broken down by subject area, on all public spending to support research, and make appropriate recommendations to the Prime Minister; he should also attend Treasury meetings at which departmental budgets are considered; departmental CSAs should provide Ministers with timely information in advance of budget negotiations, to ensure that research funding decisions are informed by the best available advice. The Committee was also alerted to problems concerning the funding of cross-departmental research involving multiple funding agencies, including research to meet the grand challenges that society faces. To meet such challenges, the Committee recommends the establishment of specific mechanisms: to identify major cross-cutting policy challenges; and to identify, fund and co-ordinate appropriate responses to such challenges.
Author: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
Publisher: National Academies Press
ISBN: 0309450047
Category : Medical
Languages : en
Pages : 165
Get Book
Book Description
The medical research landscape in the United States is supported by a variety of organizations that spend billions of dollars in government and private funds each year to seek answers to complex medical and public health problems. The largest government funder is the National Institutes of Health (NIH), followed by the Department of Defense (DoD). Almost half of DoD's medical research funding is administered by the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs (CDMRP). The mission of CDMRP is to foster innovative approaches to medical research in response to the needs of its stakeholdersâ€"the U.S. military, their families, the American public, and Congress. CDMRP funds medical research to be performed by other government and nongovernmental organizations, but it does not conduct research itself. The major focus of CDMRP funded research is the improved prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases, injuries, or conditions that affect service members and their families, and the general public. The hallmarks of CDMRP include reviewing applications for research funding using a two-tiered review process, and involving consumers throughout the process. Evaluation of the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs Review Process evaluates the CDMRP two-tiered peer review process, its coordination of research priorities with NIH and the Department of Veterans Affairs, and provides recommendations on how the process for reviewing and selecting studies can be improved.
Author: National Science Board (U.S.). Ad Hoc Committee on Strategic Science and Engineering Policy Issues
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Budget
Languages : en
Pages : 164
Get Book
Book Description
Author: National Research Council and Institute of Medicine
Publisher: National Academies Press
ISBN: 0309054974
Category : Education
Languages : en
Pages : 500
Get Book
Book Description
How do we effectively teach children from homes in which a language other than English is spoken? In Improving Schooling for Language-Minority Children, a committee of experts focuses on this central question, striving toward the construction of a strong and credible knowledge base to inform the activities of those who educate children as well as those who fund and conduct research. The book reviews a broad range of studiesâ€"from basic ones on language, literacy, and learning to others in educational settings. The committee proposes a research agenda that responds to issues of policy and practice yet maintains scientific integrity. This comprehensive volume provides perspective on the history of bilingual education in the United States; summarizes relevant research on development of a second language, literacy, and content knowledge; reviews past evaluation studies; explores what we know about effective schools and classrooms for these children; examines research on the education of teachers of culturally and linguistically diverse students; critically reviews the system for the collection of education statistics as it relates to this student population; and recommends changes in the infrastructure that supports research on these students.
Author: National Research Council
Publisher: National Academies Press
ISBN: 0309182131
Category : Political Science
Languages : en
Pages : 236
Get Book
Book Description
In 1995, the National Science Foundation (NSF) created a special account to fund large (several tens of millions of dollars) research facilities. Over the years, these facilities have come to represent an increasingly prominent part of the nation's R&D portfolio. Recently concern has intensified about the way NSF is selecting projects for this account. In 2003, six U.S. Senators including the chair and ranking member of the Senate Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies Appropriations expressed these concerns in a letter to the NRC asking it to "review the current prioritization process and report to us on how it can be improved." This report presents a series of recommendations on how NSF can improve its priority setting process for large research facilities. While noting that NSF has improved this process, the report states that further strengthening is needed if NSF is to meet future demands for such projects.
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Federal aid
Languages : en
Pages : 56
Get Book
Book Description
Author: Great Britain: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
Publisher:
ISBN: 9780101792820
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 7
Get Book
Book Description
Government response to the Committee's 3rd report of session 2009-10 (HL paper 104-I, ISBN 9780108472329)
Author: National Research Council
Publisher: National Academies Press
ISBN: 0309316855
Category : Business & Economics
Languages : en
Pages : 280
Get Book
Book Description
The past half-century has witnessed a dramatic increase in the scale and complexity of scientific research. The growing scale of science has been accompanied by a shift toward collaborative research, referred to as "team science." Scientific research is increasingly conducted by small teams and larger groups rather than individual investigators, but the challenges of collaboration can slow these teams' progress in achieving their scientific goals. How does a team-based approach work, and how can universities and research institutions support teams? Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science synthesizes and integrates the available research to provide guidance on assembling the science team; leadership, education and professional development for science teams and groups. It also examines institutional and organizational structures and policies to support science teams and identifies areas where further research is needed to help science teams and groups achieve their scientific and translational goals. This report offers major public policy recommendations for science research agencies and policymakers, as well as recommendations for individual scientists, disciplinary associations, and research universities. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science will be of interest to university research administrators, team science leaders, science faculty, and graduate and postdoctoral students.
