Early Careers for Biomedical Scientists: Doubling (and Troubling) Outcomes. Paula Stephan Georgia State University February 26, 2007

Transcription

1 Early Careers for Biomedical Scientists: Doubling (and Troubling) Outcomes Paula Stephan Georgia State University February 26, 2007

2 Overview Throughout 1990s concern expressed regarding workforce outcomes for early career biomedical scientists In late 1990s, NIH budget began an expansion that resulted in a doubling of the budget over a 5-year period Here we examine the effects of this doubling on careers of young life scientists

3 Overview continued Begin by discussing why the young are of special interest Continue by summarizing the early career situation for biomedical scientists in the 1990s. Update the situation, for 2003 and Examine NIH funding patterns during and after the doubling Conclude with a summary and discussion of what the future may hold

4 Acknowledgements/Caveats Portion of presentation uses data from Survey of Doctorate Recipients. Use of data does not imply NSF endorsement of research methods or conclusions. SDR data are for PhDs who received their doctoral training in U.S.; includes MD/PhDs; fails to count those who received PhD training outside the U.S. Views expressed are not those of NIH Acknowledge support from the Science and Engineering Workforce Project funded by Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

5 Why Focus on the Young? Relationship of age to productivity Cohort effects: initial labor market conditions when one gets a PhD have impact throughout career Young have been drawn to study biomedical sciences because of a love of science highly motivated Efficiency concerns is this a rational policy? Signals created by poor prospects affect future flows into PhD programs

6 Situation in 1990s In 1996 NRC established a committee to study trends in the early careers of life scientists. Rationale for study was that production of PhDs had been growing but job market outcomes had not. Manifested by such indicators as Increase in time to degree Increase in number holding postdoc position and length of postdoc position Decrease in probability of holding a tenure track position Decline in NIH support for young investigators

7 Chaired by Shirley Tilghman, Currently President of Princeton NRC Committee

8 Number of Ph.D.s Conferred in the Biomedical Sciences Years Number of P h.d.'s Source: NRC Report T otal Ph.D.s

9 8.5 Median Time to Degree and Age at Degree (US Life-Science Ph.D.s in the Biomedical Sciences) Time to Degree Median Age at Time of Degree Year 28.5 Time to Degree Median Age at Time of Degree Source: NRC Report

10 65 Percent of US Life-Science Ph.D.s in the Biomedical Sciences Planning Post Doctoral Training Upon Graduation Percent Year Postdoctoral Appointments Source: NRC Report

11 Fraction of Biomedical Life Science Doctorates in Postdoctoral Appointments in Academe, Industry, and Government ( ) Percent Years Since Ph.D. 3-4 Years Since Ph.D. 5-6 Years Since Ph.D. Interview D ate Source: NRC Report

12 Percent of Biomedical Life Science Ph.D.s in Selected Sectors (5-6 Years Since Degree) Percent Tenure-Track Faculty Position at PhD Institutions Tenure-Track Faculty Position at Other Institutions Industry Federal Labs and Other Government Other Employment Sector Source: NRC Report

13 Number of Biomedical Life Science Ph.D.s in Selected Sectors (5-6 Years Since Degree) Number Tenure-Track Tenure-Track Industry Federal Labs and Other Faculty Position at Faculty Position at Other Government PhD Institutions Other Institutions Employment Sector Source: NRC Report

14 Percent of Biom edical Life Science Ph.D.s in Part-time, Temporary Positions or Unemployed (5-6 Years Since Receipt of Ph.D.) Percent Survey Year Postdocs Employed Part-time Unemployed and Seeking Other Academic Positions Data: NRC Report

15 Data: NRC Report 60 Percent of Life-Science Ph.D.s in Selected Sectors (5-6 Years Since Degree) 1973 and 1995 by Ranking of Institution Percent Tenure-Track Faculty Position at PhD Institutions Tenure-Track Faculty Position at Other Institutions Industry Interview Date Federal Labs and Other Government Other Quality Institutions (1973) Quality Institutions(1995) Series5 Other Institutions (1973) Other Institutions (1995)

16 NIH Support For those 35 and Younger 1993 about 380 awards 1994 about 410 awards 1995 about 350 awards 1996 about 340 awards 1997 about 330 awards 1998 about 330 awards Average age at first independent award in 1980: 37; average age in Continued to rise during 1990s.

17 Summary of Recommendations of NRC Committee Restraint of the Rate of Growth of the Number of Graduate Students in the Life Sciences Dissemination of Accurate Information on the Career Prospects of Young Life Scientists Improvement of the Educational Experience of Graduate Students Enhancement of Opportunities for Independence of Postdoctoral Fellows Alternative Paths to Careers in the Life Sciences

18 Post Report Situation NIH budget doubled Number of PhDs residing in U.S. who trained in U.S. aged 35 or younger increased; postdocs trained outside the U.S. also increased. Hiring patterns of U.S. trained changed somewhat, with a lag See this by looking at NSF data and at AAMC Faculty Roster Data

19 NIH Budget BUDGET AUTHORITY FY 1977 FY 2007 (Current vs. Constant 1977 Dollars Using BRDPI as the Inflation Factor)(Dollars in Billions) $30 $25 $20 $15 $10 $5 $ Current Dollars Constant Dollars OER: NIH Budget over time

20 Biomedical PhDs Trained in U.S. Age 35 or Younger 20,000 Number 15,000 10,000 5, Year Age 35 or Younger Source: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, NSF. The use of NSF data does not imply NSF endorsement of the research methods or conclusions contained in this report.

21 Biomedical PhDs Trained in U.S. Age 35 or Younger 20,000 Number 15,000 10,000 5, Year Age 35 or Younger In Tenure-track Jobs Source: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, NSF. The use of NSF data does not imply NSF endorsement of the research methods or conclusions contained in this report.

22 Conclude Number of tenure track positions occupied by those trained in the U.S. 35 and younger held constant at best until 2001; then grew somewhat towards end of NIH doubling. Probability that a young person trained in biomedical life sciences in U.S. holds a tenure track position is about the same in 2003 as it was in 1993 and improved between 2001 and 2003: 10.3 % to 10.4% (or from 6.9% in 2001). Next slides show that postdoc situation also improved; non-tenure track positions grew during the period

23 Proportion of Biomedical PhDs Trained in U.S. in Postdoc Positions By Time Since Degree Percentage Year 0-2 Years 3-4 Years 5-6 Years 7-8 Years Over 8 Years Source: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, NSF. The use of NSF data does not imply NSF endorsement of the research methods or conclusions contained in this report.

24 Labor Force Status of Biomedical PhDs Trained in U.S. Age 35 or Younger in Other than Tenure-Track Positions Number 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2, Year Unemployed & Out of the Labor Force PT Employed Other FT Employed Postdoc Not Tenure-track Source: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, NSF. The use of NSF data does not imply NSF endorsement of the research methods or conclusions contained in this report.

25 Labor Market Outcomes in the Biomedical Sciences Across Age Groups Tenure track by age Full-time employment by sector Tenure-track status in academe Labor force status

26 Tenure Track Biomedical Faculty by Age 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5, G LE 35 Tenure track status is for those trained in U.S. Source: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, NSF. The use of NSF data does not imply NSF endorsement of the research methods or conclusions contained in this report.

27 Labor Force Status: Biomedical PhDs Unemployed/Out of Labor Force Part Time Full time not university Post doc Total Academe Labor force Status for those trained in the U.S. Source: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, NSF. The use of NSF data does not imply NSF endorsement of the research methods or conclusions contained in this report.

28 Full Time Positions by Sector: Biomedical Sciences Full time not university Post doc Total Academe Slide shows positions for those trained in the U.S. Source: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, NSF. The use of NSF data does not imply NSF endorsement of the research methods or conclusions contained in this report.

29 Summary Growth in non-academic sector jobs has outpaced growth in academic sector jobs during the period for those trained in the United States. Growth in those unemployed or out of the labor force Decline in percent in post doc positions from 13.3% to 9.7%

30 Tenure Track Status: Biomedical Sciences total-non-tenure track Total tenure-track Slide shows tenure tract status for those trained in the United States. Source: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, NSF. The use of NSF data does not imply NSF endorsement of the research methods or conclusions contained in this report.

31 Summary Growth in academic positions for those trained in the United States during past 10 years of about 33% Growth is noticeable during NIH-doubling period Growth has been heavily concentrated in the non-tenure track positions Non-tenure track has grown by over 70% Tenure-track has grown by 20%

32 Medical Colleges vs. Non-medical Colleges Next slides show that Growth has been in medical colleges Especially among non-tenure track positions

33 Academic Positions by Sector total medical total non-medical Slide shows positions held by those trained in the United States. Source: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, NSF. The use of NSF data does not imply NSF endorsement of the research methods or conclusions contained in this report.

34 Medical Faulcy Positions by Tenure Track, Biomedical Sciences Non Tenture Track Tenure Track Slide is for those trained in the U.S. Source: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, NSF. The use of NSF data does not imply NSF endorsement of the research methods or conclusions contained in this report.

35 Summary See growth in hiring of individuals trained in the U.S. among medical colleges during the decade relative to non-medical colleges Change in mix of tenure and tenure track 33% of medical faculty were in non-tenure track positions in 1993; 45% were in non-tenure track positions in Considerable growth in hiring at medical colleges during the NIH doubling period

36 Non Tenure Track Positions, Biomedical Sciences, Medical Schools Other Not TT Full Not TT Associate Not TT Assistant Not TT Slide is for those trained in the U.S. Source: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, NSF. The use of NSF data does not imply NSF endorsement of the research methods or conclusions contained in this report.

37 Non Tenure Track Positions, Biomedical Sciences, Medical Schools Assistant Not TT Associate Not TT Full Not TT Other Not TT Slide is for those trained in the U.S. Source: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, NSF. The use of NSF data does not imply NSF endorsement of the research methods or conclusions contained in this report.

38 Other Data Indicators AAMC Faculty Roster Data Bricks and Mortar

39 First Assistant Professorship: Medical Schools Year AAMC Data MD-PhD PhD MD Number

40 Average Age at Time of First Assistant Professorship at US Medical Schools AAMC Faculty Roster Data as of March 31, 2006 MD/PhD PhD MD AAMC Data

41 Faculty Medical Schools: Basic Sciences physiology microbiology Biochemistry AAMC Data

42 S&E Research Space: Academic Institutions Net Assignable Sq. Ft. (millions) Agricultural sciences Biological sciences Computer sciences Earth and Ocean Engineering Mathematics Medical sciences Physical sciences Year

43 New Construction NSF reports greatest number of institutions began construction in fields of biological and medical sciences in FY2002 or FY % of newly constructed space to be used for these 2 fields

44 Appears to be good news for early career biomedical scientists Age of first assistantship fell for first time in 2003 Jobs on an increase (or were). But SDR data is already out of date The pickup was relatively modest for the young. Even in the best of times fewer than one-in seven of young biomedical PhDs have an academic appointment (tenure-track or non-tenure track). Hiring was concentrated in non-tenure track positions. The pickup that occurred was fueled in part by new buildings coming on line which in turn were fueled by NIH budget growth. Lagged the doubling. But

45 Jobs come with high expectations Faculty expected to generate grants Not new, but more and more frequently this is a condition of employment. Three years to cover salary. Many tenure-track positions paid out of soft-money Not one grant or two grants but three became expectation at many research institutions Not surprising that Number of NIH applications on increase Many established investigators increased their number of grants and size of their labs.

46 NIH Situation Budgets have been flat, growing at less than inflation. From $27.2 billion in 2003 to $28.7 in Costs of grants are rising Results in more grant applications chasing constant to declining pool of resources Translates into lower success rates Most applications come from individuals who already have grants. New investigator pool is on decline after peeking in 2003.

47 NIH Primer R01 is basic grant for independent research; in earlier years R29 existed as the first independent award for new investigators. Duration of three to five years. Type 1 is a new application Type 2 is a continuing application Type 1 s can be from new investigators who have never been funded or from established investigators Review process: triage group that is not scored; possible to submit up to two amendments; can resubmit even if not scored. Important to distinguish between applicants and applications

48 Number of NIH Competing R01 Equivalent* Applications, Awards and Percent Funded (Success Rate) 30 35% 25 30% Number of Applicatio (in Thousands) % 20% 15% 10% Percent Funde 5 5% % Fiscal Year Reviewed Awarded Success Rate NIH, OER: Investment R01 Equivalent* Includes R01, R23, R29 and R37

49 Number of NIH Competing R01 Equivalent* Applicants Reviewed, Awarded, and Percent Funded (Success Rate) Number of Applica (in Thousands) % 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% Percent Funde % Fiscal Year Reviewed Awarded Percent Funded R01 Equivalent* Includes R01, R23, R29 and R37 NIH, OER: Investment

50 NIH COMPETING R01 EQUIVALENT APPLICATIONS BY YEAR OF REVIEW NIH Competing R01 Applications by Year of Review 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2, Review Year Original New Applications Original Competing Continuations Amendments to New Applications Amendments to Competing Continuations NIH, OER for AIRI

51 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Number of New and Established Investigators Receiving Competing and R01 and R01 Equivalent Grants to 1962 to Fiscal Year 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 1962 Number of Grants Percent Grants to New Investigators Established Investigators New Investigators Percent New Investigators NIH, OER for AIRI

52 35% NIH New (Type 1) Competing R01 Equivalent Applications Success rates for first time and previously funded investigators 30% 26.9% 28.3% 28.7% 28.1% 27.0% 26.9% 25% 25.4% 23.7% Success Rate 20% 15% 20.6% 18.4% 15.9% 21.3% 17.0% 20.3% 18.1% 21.7% 19.1% 21.1% 22.5% 21.5% 22.2% 21.9% 21.2% 20.6% 22.5% 16.8% 10% 5% 0% Fiscal Year Previously Funded Investigators First Time Investigators R01 Equivalent = R01, R29, and R37 activities. NIH, OER for GREAT

53 Number of Different NIH Competing Research Project Grants Awarded to New Investigators, FY Fiscal Year R01 R23 R29 R03 R21 Other NIH, OER for GREAT Number of Awards to New Investigators

54 New Investigator Situation Virtually no increase in funding of new investigators in traditional R01 Growth for new investigators has been in the R03 and R21 which are small in terms of funding and length of award. R03 small research project-- $50,000 per year for two years; R21 investigator-initiated exploratory development research up to two years, not to exceed $275,000).

55 NIH Support Of First Time Investigators Number of Awards NIH Competing R01/R29 awards to individuals without prior research grant support Pre-doubling Period of Doubling Fiscal Year Post Doubling 2005 Other AIRI NIH, OER for AIRI

56 AVERAGE AGE OF COMPETING R01 EQUIVALENT AWARDEES Average Age of Competing R01 Equivalent Awards Agerage age Average Age of New investigators Average Age of All investigators NIH, OER for AIRI

57 14.5% 15.8% 17.0% 17.9% 19.6% 21.7% 22.7% 23.9% 24.9% 27.5% 27.6% DISTRIBUTION OF INVESTIGATOR AGES NIH Competing R01 Equivalent Awardee 14.6% 20.8% 15.2% 14.6% 15.7% 20.3% 20.3% 20.5% 16.4% 21.4% 16.6% 16.3% 16.0% 22.1% 21.7% 21.7% 17.4% 18.1% 18.2% 21.1% 21.1% 22.2% 24.9% 23.9% 24.6% 23.1% 22.4% 21.4% 21.7% 20.9% 20.0% 20.1% 19.6% 19.0% 18.4% 17.1% 16.5% 15.6% 14.1% 13.8% 13.0% 13.1% 12.9% 12.0% 6.2% 6.4% 6.4% 6.2% 4.8% 4.0% 3.8% 4.5% 3.5% 3.8% 3.4% Fiscal Year 35 and Younger Over 55 NIH, OER for AIRI

58 Summarize NIH Data During Doubling Tremendous increase in number of new R01 applications Majority come from established investigators Number of established investigators receiving R01s has increased dramatically Increase in percent of investigators who have more than one grant Creates significant change in age-distribution of NIH awardees

59 Kangaroo Solution? Pathway to Independence Award Program: K99/R to 200 postdoctoral candidates for each of next 5 years. Mentored support while post doc followed by 3 years of R01-level funding, contingent upon securing a tenure-track position with appropriate institutional support and resources. A program with unintended consequences?

60 Program came out of the NRC Committee Report: Bridges to Independence

61 Summary During doubling New grants to established investigators have increased dramatically. Virtually no increase in funding of new investigators in traditional R01 Growth for new investigators has been in the R03 and R21 which are small in terms of funding and length of award. NIH increasingly is supporting established, older investigators. Small number of Kangaroo awards means that implementation will have little effect on age distribution. Success rates for R01s are declining; Success rates are especially low for new investigators. Increased proportion of applications are being triaged and thus do not receive comments. Speed up review process as a solution? Bridge money is being sought from universities.

62 What does future hold? Assuming NIH situation stays as is Universities will have to find alternative ways to pay for buildings. NIH pick up less of tab; some relief as early-funded R01s lapse NIH is beginning to put brakes on tuition increases which universities relied on Recent faculty hires will have an especially difficult time getting funding and staying funded. Bridge money is constrained. Labs will downsize. Staff will be laid off. Young and untenured will bear disproportionate share of adjustment costs.

63 Future continued... Jobs, especially tenure-track jobs, are unlikely to increase Young researchers will increasingly need to look for alternative places to do research Unclear whether jobs in industry will expand sufficiently to absorb these young researchers

64 Lessons/Questions Fallacy of composition Even in the best of times, the young don t benefit that much from increases in funding Soft landing? Do additional grants for productive scientists significantly contribute to scientific knowledge? Time to rethink the way in which research labs are staffed in the United States?