Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1 of 2 Summer 2017 FCG Meeting
AGENDA CSUPERB Faculty Consensus Group (FCG) Summer Meeting
CSU Office of the Chancellor (Long Beach) – Dumke Auditorium Monday, July 31, 2017
8:00 am Breakfast and Informal Networking
9:00 am Call to Order & Welcome (Mike Goldman, San Francisco State University & FCG Chair) • Introductions: FCG Representatives and Guests
9:10 am FCG Service Review (Kathie McReynolds, CSU Sacramento & FCG Deputy Chair) • Committee/Taskforce participation • Social media and websites
9:20 am Program Overview (Susan Baxter, Executive Director, CSUPERB) • AY 17-18 Budget and Implementation Plan • AY 16-17 Grant Program Reporting • 30th Annual Biotechnology Symposium Preview • 2018-2021 Strategic Planning Process
10:00 am Defending Science Before Government, Press & Public CSUPERB FCG members and PIs serve as ambassadors for science, math and engineering on our own campuses. However, science today seems under siege. Skinny budgets cut research funding and infrastructure. International collaboration is hampered by immigration and travel restrictions. Alternative facts reign. Scientists can no longer ignore the politics and the confusion. Today’s speakers will opine on and teach us how best to make the case for STEM higher education, academic research, and research-based entrepreneurship to the public, the news media, and government officials.
• Jim Gelb, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Federal Relations, California State University
• Katie Wilkinson, Assistant Professor, San Jose State University, 2014 Society for Neuroscience Early Career Policy Fellow, and editor of the SJSU Science Policy Blog (http://blogs.sjsu.edu/sciencepolicy/)
• Kevin M. Wilson, Director, Public Policy and Media Relations, American Society for Cell Biology
• Elizabeth Chapin, Manager, Public Affairs, California State University
2 of 2 Summer 2017 FCG Meeting
12:00 pm Lunch & Informal Discussions with Morning Session Speakers
1:00 pm Workshop: Public Engagement “Strike Force Training” for FCG
CSUPERB’s AY 17-18 annual operating plan, approved by the Chancellor and the Presidents’ Commission, includes a goal to “Develop outreach strategy to bolster external stakeholder and legislative support for STEM education, research & entrepreneurship.” This spring the Strategic Planning Council brainstormed about tactics to address this goal. They concluded outreach is no longer sufficient; we need to engage better with the public. As a first step, the SPC would like to see campus FCG teams transformed into campus-based “strike forces.” FCG teams can collect and broadcast positive impacts of work funded by CSUPERB grants and - at the same time - educate the public about how STEM education, research and entrepreneurship contribute to society. We’ll build on the morning talks to workshop a public engagement toolkit for CSUPERB’s FCG Strike Force! (note: The workshop design is based on lessons learned from a AAAS Public Engagement Workshop hosted on the Trellis web-platform this spring).
3:00 pm Adjourn
Summer 2017 Faculty Consensus Group (FCG) Meeting Chancellor’s Office Long Beach Monday, July 31, 2017
Agenda Highlights • Call-to-Order & Introductions (FCG, Visitors & Guests) • FCG Service Review • Quick CSUPERB Program Review • Special Session (Invited Speakers): Defending Science
Before Government, Press & Public • Networking Lunch • Workshop: Creating an FCG Strike Force For Public
Engagement
FCG Business
• Introductions • Responsibilities (Kathie McReynolds)
How do we keep up with what’s happening? – www.calstate.edu/csuperb (home page) – Monthly newsletter (sign up at home page) – Facebook (geared toward students/careers) – Emails announcing RFPs, RFAs, Call for Teams – Twitter (@csu_icorps)
• Note: We are abandoning our LinkedIn Group Page due to changes at LinkedIn – looking for an alternative (Slack? LinkedIn University Page)
FCG Service Requirements
• Committee / Taskforce / Peer Review participation • Work with campus FCG team to develop a communication plan
(today’s workshop) • Stay informed via social media sites & website
www.calstate.edu/csuperb + sign up for monthly newsletter (at home page)
• Recommended Campus Best Practices: – reach out & involve faculty colleagues in science, engineering,
health, business colleges (= biotech-relevant disciplines) – encourage students and faculty to attend symposium – mentor Howell-CSUPERB & Presidents’ Commission scholars – nominate students and colleagues for awards – encourage (& mentor!) colleagues to apply for CSUPERB grants
Program Overview
• AY 17-18 Budget and Implementation Plan • AY 16-17 Grant Program Reporting • 30th Annual Biotechnology Symposium
Preview • 2018-2021 Strategic Planning Process 30th Year Anniversary History Reminder: Education Code (Legislation Establishing CSUPERB): “…maintain and enhance [the CSU’s] role in the preparation of the workforce in this critical industry [and]…incubation of new bioscience enterprise…”
1. "Expand Experiential Learning” • CSU I-Corps competitive renewal submitted to NSF in early February;
Baxter invited to present on panels with NSF and NIH at National Innovation Network meeting and VentureWell Open.
• >325 individuals from 19 CSU campuses, 20 other universities and >40
external organizations have participated in CSU I-Corps programming since 2014.
2. "Innovate Biotech Education” • “Soft-skills” centric programs for
students (Lightning Talks, Career Networking, Graduate School Information & The Wow Me sessions) were very well-received, based on participant surveys
• The new NSF GRFP proposal writing workshop at the symposium was very well attended – lots of interest and active engagement, including two alumni speakers
• At the symposium CSUPERB partnered with Student Success Network (EdInsights, CSU Sacramento) to explore cross-divisional collaboration for STEM student success
3. “Partner with Industry”
• The Ignite22 “regional partnering meeting” in San Pedro was a success. We partnered with COAST & ARI to invite innovative faculty researchers.
• Worked with CSLI and BIOCOM on the 2016 Talent Integration (biotech workforce development) report finally released in full in Fall 2016.
• Won NSF support for a BIO 2017 I-Corps workshop for underrepresented researchers nationwide (partnered with UNCF, ASM/ABRCMS, BIOCOM, CLSI and AUTM).
Other (Baxter) Service to CSU System
• CSU Intellectual Property (IP) Committee– Baxter spoke at June 5 one-day workshop on Tech Transfer for
research administrators
• Student Success Network– Advisory Board, EdInsights at CSU Sacramento - now funded
by the State as an ongoing affinity group
• STEM Education:– Presented at AHSIE with Holly Unruh (CSU Monterey Bay),
Winny Dong (Cal Poly Pomona) & Amy Sprowles (Humboldt State) re: undergrad research assessment
– Panelist at STEM Conference Aug. 10-11
Proposed AY 2016-2017 Annual Operating Plan
2015 – 2018 Strategic Objectives
Expand Experiential Learning Opportunities across CSU (continue support of student-faculty research & entrepreneurship opportunities)
Innovate Biotech Education (embed experiential learning throughout curriculum + support multi-disciplinary & soft skills educational needs)
Partner with the life sciences industry (grow entrepreneurship/commercialization networks + build a sustainable, involved alumni network)
• Continue CSUPERBcompetitive grantprograms & report outimpact and outcomesdata from supportedPIs and students
•
CSU I-Corp program
• Host industrynetworkingopportunities forfaculty as part of I-Corps activities
•
y
• Continue
•
•
Organize and hostworkshop to addresseffective STEMeducation andmentoring
• yprograms to embedand scale soft skillsdevelopment for
y students
• Strengthen industry & alumniinvolvement in CSU I-Corps& Annual CSU BiotechSymposium
• amore defined & sustainablealumni network & database
• Broaden outreach &communications, targetingnot only existing CSUPERBcommunity, but also externalstakeholders & legislators
Proposed AY 16-17 Annual Operating Plan
for faculty
AY 2017-2018 Budget Approved (handout) Tight budget year driven by increased Symposium Costs at Santa Clara Marriott
• We want to maintain number of participants (posters) at symposium
• We decided to raise registration fees – to $100 (from $90) for students & to $150 (from $125) for faculty
• We decided to reduce amount of Joint Venture grants (from $25,000 to $15,000). Will lower amount lead to more proposals (fewer match $ required)?
CSUPERB Actual Expense/Budget Trend
Grant Programs Reporting
• By handout this year to save time!
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
Percent of CSUPERB Seed Grants with Follow-On Funding (FOF) >$100K (total award amount), 2010-2015
Overall FOF % (all Seed Grant programs)
New Investigator
Research Development
Joint Venture
Curriculum Development
Overall - Grant Programs Portfolio Working As Designed
Student Impacts New
Courses
Student Outcomes
Collaborations
New Programs
New Courses
Student Impacts New
Partners
Joint Ventures
Community Partners
Student Outcomes
Student-founded New Co
Fiscal return-on-investment
is not, of course,
the whole CSUPERB story
Research Discoveries
Research Discoveries
Upcoming Grant Proposal DeadlinesCSU I-Corps Microgrants – Fall 2017 Call for Teams
• RFP Release: January, 2017• Proposal Deadline: Rolling until August 28, 2017
• Review & Decisions within 3 weeks of application receipt
Howell-CSUPERB Research Scholars• RFP Release: August, 2017• Proposal Deadline: October 16, 2017• Review: November, 2017; Award Notifications: December, 2017
Faculty & Student Travel Grant Programs (Fall & Spring)• RFP Release: Fall - August, 2017 Spring - February, 2018 • Proposal Deadline: Fall – October 9, 2017 Spring - March 12, 2018 • Review: Fall – November, 2017 Spring - April, 2018 • Award Notifications: Fall – December, 2017 Spring - May, 2018
New Investigator, Research Development, Joint Venture & Curriculum Development • RFP Release: August, 2017• Proposal Deadline: February 5, 2018• Review Meeting: April 14, 2018• Award Notifications: May, 2018
Presidents’ Commission Scholars Program• RFP Release: August, 2017• Proposal Deadline: February 19, 2018• Review: March, 2018• Award Notifications: April, 2018
Seed Grant in person peer review will be held in the San Francisco Bay area. Specific location TBD.
30th Annual CSU Biotechnology Symposium
Santa Clara Marriott, January 11-13, 2018
Symposium Preview• Return to Santa Clara Marriott, January 11-13, 2018
• We do have “run of the house” (not venue-limited)
• Registration Fee - $100 for students ($10 increase); $150 for faculty ($25 increase)
• Posters
– Limitations on poster number have been budget &/or venue-driven for 8 of last 10 years (meaning not all poster abstracts submitted were accepted)
– We have budgeted for 290 posters in 2018, the same as 2017 – The poster abstract acceptance rate was 73% in 2017, the
2018 rate will depend upon the number submitted – please point applicants to the abstract review criteria!
We received a record level of poster abstracts for review in 2017(n = 397; >10% increase year over year) 2017 poster acceptance rate = 73% (74% in 2016)
Projected 2018 Symposium Budget
• 2018 Marriott Contract: lodging costs have increased from $104/night in2017 to $109/night in 2018. Meal costs increased approximately 7%
• Thus: registration increase from $90 to $100 for students and from $125 to$150 for faculty.
• Per student cost approximately $591. Posters accepted will be limited to 290(same as 2017). Event budget increases by $6,800.
The CSUPERB T-Shirt
“Research is Education and the#1 Biotech Workforce Need”
(= project-based, experiential learning, discovery, teamwork, reporting-out, multi-disciplinarity, dealing with failure, etc.…)
New 3-Year Strategic Plan Due in Spring
• (Sept) System-wide Surveys Collected
• (Oct) Strategic Planning Retreat
• (Nov – Jan) Plan Drafting
• (Feb) Present to Presidents’ Commission
• (March) Redraft as Needed
• (April) Submit to Chancellor for Approval EO 1103
FCG: SHORT DISCUSSION – SURVEY TOPICS
Strategic Planning Council & Program Office staff always looking for ideas to guide activities (catch us at lunch!)
CSUPERB FOURTH QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT FY 16/17
FY 16/17 Budget
1
% o
f B
ud
ge
t
Expenses - Jun. 30, 2017 %
of
Ca
teg
ory Balance
Salaries & Office Operations 469,469 25% 459,142 98% 10,327
Program Operations & Outreach 138,226 7% 144,425 2 104% (6,199)
Symposium 328,280 18% 336,552 3 103% (8,272)
Grants & Taskforce Operations 721,143 39% 714,222 4 99% 6,921
Howell-CSUPERB Research Scholars 41,250 38,728 2,522
Presidents' Commission Scholars 88,000 88,000 -
Pauling Student Teaching Award 4,000 4,000 -
Seed Grants (JV, CD, NI & RD) 514,393 535,285 (20,892)
Travel Grants - Faculty/Student (Spring & Fall) 55,500 39,040 16,460
Taskforce Operations 18,000 15,706 2,294
Funds Returned to CSUPERB by Grantees - (6,536) 6,536
NSF I-Corps Grant - Year 3 - Restricted Funds 207,959 11% 60,122 5 29% 147,837
Total Operating Budget 1,865,077 100% 1,714,462 150,615
Notes:
Budget Funding Sources FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Variance
CSU Platform Budget (State Funding) 1,068,828 1,077,456 8,628 SDSU Funding for Staff Salary Increases 5,112 5,376 264 Campus Tithe (State Funding) 430,324 465,396 35,072 Carryover From Prior Year (State Funding) 11,155 4,710 (6,445) Symposium Registrations (State Funding) 55,680 62,680 7,000 NSF I-Corps Site Grant (Research Foundation) 100,000 207,959 107,959 Symposium Sponsorships (Research Foundation) 15,000 15,600 600 Howell Foundation Funds (Research Foundation) 21,000 19,250 (1,750) Pauling Award Endowment (Research Foundation) 4,000 4,000 - Specific Planned Expenses (Research Foundation) 2,650 2,650 -
Total Funding Sources 1,713,749 1,865,077 151,328
Operating Budget
1 Presidents' Commission approved budget, revised based on: actual 15/16 fiscal year carryover amounts ($4710 actual v. $10,995 budgeted), symposium registration fees collected ($62,680 actual v. $55,680 budgeted), symposium sponsorships ($15,600 actual v. $15,000 budgeted), and Howell Foundation ($19,250 actual v. $21,000 budgeted). Transfers of campus contributions (tithe) portion of budget are complete.
2 The final quarter includes Spring 2017 Seed Grant review and Spring SPC meeting expenses.
3 Symposium expenses are complete. Overages were a result of actual audiovisual expenses and greater than anticipated travel claims.
4 The overage in the Seed Grants category is due to program policy where all excess funds at fiscal year end are redirected to fund additional grants. Travel Grant expenditures are the results of claims from the last two rounds received and paid by CSUPERB by the conclusion of the fiscal year.
5 This is the third/extension year of a three-year, $300,000 grant from the National Science Foundation to support the CSU I-Corps program. Funds are managed through the SDSU Research Foundation. The no-cost extension is currently slated to continue through February 2018.
1 of 2
Non-State Accounts Cash Position: FY 16/17 3rd Qtr. Balance
Increases/ Decreases
SDSU Research FoundationC00330 13,833 3,076 16,909
C00480 43,682 143 43,825
N00597 33,546 1,896 35,442
N00929 154,545 8,735 163,280
245,606 13,850 259,456
Office of the Chancellor
CSUPERB 250 - 250 250 - 250
Grand Total - Non-State Accounts 245,856 13,850 259,706
Non-State Account Narratives:
C00330
C00480
N00597
N00929
CSUPERB
This fund was established in October of 1999. C00480 is the primary recipient of donations to the CSUPERB program, and is also the most active of the cash accounts. It is primarily used to pay for expenses related to the CSU Biotechnology Symposium as well as the donated portion of the Howell-CSUPERB Research Scholars Awards. It also receives investment income from the CSUPERB Quasi Endowment (N00597).
CSUPERB - Quasi EndowmentThis fund was established in April of 1998. The fund was established with two primary donations, one from CHIRON Corporation, a biotechnology company based in Emeryville, CA (at the time) and the second from the Giles W. and Elise G. Mead Foundation in Napa, CA. The revenue from the two donations, $5,000 and $25,000 respectively are to support, but are not limited to, seminars and symposiums. Investment earnings from the endowment are deposited to fund C00480 for use. Spending from the Quasi Endowment principal is made only on a limited basis, and must be approved by the CSUPERB governing body.
Crellin Pauling Student Teaching Award - Full EndowmentThis fund was established in September of 2011. The fund was established with a donation from Dr. Kay Pauling with the intent of funding the annual "Crellin Pauling Student Teaching Awards" in perpetuity. Proceeds from the endowment are transferred quarterly to Campanile Foundation fund C00330 so that sufficient funds are available when the awards are made at the CSUPERB CSU Annual Biotechnology Symopsium each January.
CSU Foundation - CSUPERB Donation AccountThis account was established in October of 2012. This account is the recipient of online donations made to the CSUPERB program from individuals who do not state a designated purpose for the funds. The gifts are made using the online gift system administered by the CSU Foundation at the Office of the Chancellor.
Balance as of Jun. 30, 2017
Crellin Pauling Award Fund
CSUPERB - Donation Fund
CSUPERB - Quasi Endowment
C. Pauling Award Endowment
SDSU Research Foundation Total
CSU Foundation Office of the Chancellor Total
Crellin Pauling Student Teaching Award FundThis fund was established in June of 2003 with donations from Dr. Kay Pauling in honor of her husband, noted educator, and co-founder of CSUPERB, Crellin Pauling (SFSU). The purpose of this account is to fund two Crellin Pauling Student Teaching Awards (currently $1,750) awarded annually at CSUPERB's CSU Biotechnology Symposium.
CSUPERB - Campanile Donation Fund
2 of 2
Tips for Science Advocacy Ka#eWilkinson,PhD
SanJoseStateUniversity
How I got involved in advocacy
h"p://blogs.sjsu.edu/newsroom/2013/sequester-hits-sjsu/JoyFranco,Rep.MikeHonda,NinaBubalo
Society for Neuroscience Early Career Advocacy Program
KaJeWilkinson,SenatorBoxer,AnneYoung,RitaBalice-Gordon
American Physiological Society Science Policy Commi@ee
Rep.RoKhanna,KaJeWilkinson KaJeWilkinson,Rep.ZoeLofgren
Can’t get to Capitol Hill? Local ways to advocate
KaJeWilkinson,Rep.Lofgren,AnushaAllawala MarianaJimenez,ChrisVargas,VedantPatel(StafferforRep.Honda),DashaZaytseva
Host A Lab Tour In-District MeeHng
Tip #1: Be Informed About Science Policy
• Professionalsocietyadvocacycenters/emailblasts• SfN.org/AdvocacyNetwork• hAp://www.the-aps.org/mm/SciencePolicy• hAp://faseb.org/Science-Policy-and-Advocacy.aspx• hAps://policy.aibs.org/
• Twi6er• TwiAer.com/DrK_Wilkinson/lists/science-policy
• Newssites/blogs• News.sciencemag.org/category/policy
Tip #2: Know Your Elected Officials • Aretheyinanyscienceordiseaserelatedcaucuses?• Couldyouhighlightsomerecentadvancesintreatmentforadiseasetheycareabout?
• Howhavetheyvotedinthepastonscience/CSUrelatedissues?• Shouldyoubethankingthem/encouragingthemtodomoreorconvincingthem?
• IstheresomethingintheirbiographythatyoucanusetomoldyourinteracCon?• Ex:Rep.Lofgrenhasrepeatedlyintroducedabilltodelayschoolstart#mesbasedonscience.She’salsoafirstgenera#oncollegestudent.
Tip #3: Come Prepared with Talking Points (and Business Cards)
• Trytocomewithspecificasks• Isthereapieceoflegisla#onyouwantthemtovoteacertainwayon?• IsthereaDearColleagueleAertosignorcaucustojoin?
• BringinformaConthatcanhelpthestaffers/CongresspersonadvocateforyourposiCon• FASEBFactSheetsshowingleveloffederalsciencefundinginyourdistrict/state• FASEB’sBreakthroughsinBiosciencetohighlightvalueofbasicscienceresearch• GoldenGooseAward:unexpectedadvancementsfrom‘silly’science
Tip #4: Come Prepared with Personal Stories
• Don’tjustfocusonnumbers—tellyourlegislatorhowpeopleandinsCtuConsintheirdistrictsareaffected• Ibringa1pagedescrip#onofstudentsfundedbyfederal$• Didyourlastgrantjustmissoutonfunding?• Doyouknowsomeonewho’sleZscience?• Impactonjobs/jobcrea#on
• Haveyourelevatorpitchaboutyourresearch/teaching/insCtuConready• Ditchthejargon,butbereadytotalkaboutdetailsifasked-manyscience/healthpolicystaffershavePhDsorMDs
Ok, but how do I actually contact my reps? • Onlinewebpage,email,socialmedia,call• Allcallsmustbelogged.Someofficestreatwebresponses/emailssimilarly• Goodforsimplepleasevoteonxposi#ons;helpfultodoinlarge#s
• SetupmeeCngs(localorDC)• Findwebsitelinktorequestamee#ng.• Callandaskforschedulertofollowup.• Ifinvi#ngtoyourins#tu#ongivethemtheop#onofsendingastaffer
BOTTOMLINE:Itissurprisinglyeasy.
11
Map source: www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/maps/reference-cd113.html
Federal Research Funding FY 2016 District Information
Calif
orni
a’s 1
9th D
istr
ict
National Institutes of Health
NIH is the nation’s primary medical research agency. More than 80% of NIH funding is distributed through approximately 50,000 competitive grants to 300,000 researchers at 2,500 universities and other institutions throughout the U.S.
In this district, NIH awarded $1,909,610 to 3 institutions.
Data source: report.nih.gov/
National Science Foundation
Through 12,000 competitive grants and 2,000 graduate student fellowships awarded each year, NSF advances the frontiers of knowledge, cultivates a world-class scientific workforce, and builds the nation’s research capacity for innovation.
In this district, NSF awarded $5,675,856 to 4 institutions.
Data source: NSF
Office of Public Affairs • 9650 Rockville Pike • Bethesda, MD 20814
2017 SPC Hill visits background information
OUR “ASK”: Congress should increase biomedical research funding at NIH, NSF, the VA, and
NASA We will thank all Members of Congress for supporting research: Congress provided the NIH with a $2 billion funding increase in FY 2016 and FY 2017. (Other agencies got more modest increases.) We will ask Congress to raise the budget caps since otherwise they cannot increase research funding in FY 2018: A law called the Budget Control Act (BCA) limits the amount Congress can appropriate each year for discretionary programs such as medical research. These caps were suspended for FY 2016-17, but they are in place again for FY 2018. We will urge Congress to reject President Trump’s FY 2018 budget plan—and most will agree: In May, President Trump proposed an FY 2018 budget with significant cuts to many programs, including biomedical research. These ill-advised cuts would threaten the health of all Americans and weaken the US economy as a whole. Many Members of Congress have denounced the Trump budget plan. SUPPORTING ARGUMENTS: Federally-funded research is crucial for biomedical discovery: The federal government is the primary funding source for discovery research in the form of competitive grants awarded by the NIH, NSF, and VA. This research is carried out at colleges, universities, medical centers, and VA hospitals throughout the country. Because federally-funded research is a vital source of knowledge and future economic growth, the programs need stable growth from year to year.
U.S. leadership in the biomedical sciences is a direct result of this federal investment in discovery research. Breakthroughs in basic and translational research are the foundation for new drugs and therapies that help patients, fuel our economy, and provide jobs. The private sector partners with NIH to develop research findings into new treatments, but only the federal government funds discovery research itself. Stable, predictable funding is essential to our nation’s scientific research efforts. Congress should remove the limit on discretionary spending by raising the budget caps: The limits put in place by the Budget Control Act (BCA) limit federal investment in biomedical research. Two years ago Congress temporarily lifted the BCA spending caps to permit priority programs to grow. The BCA spending cap for FY 2018 and beyond will hurt research and other programs unless Congress acts to remove them. 21st Century Cures funds are no substitute for increasing NIH’s regular appropriations: Last year Congress passed the 21st Century Cures Act to reauthorize the NIH and the FDA. It also provided an additional $4.8 billion over the next 10 years for targeted programs at the NIH. These funds are exempt from the BCA spending caps and are intended to supplement regular appropriations for the agency. They cannot replace funding increases needed by other NIH programs.
AGENCY-SPECIFIC TALKING POINTS NIH: Thank you for your ongoing support of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The $2 billion funding boost provided in FY 2017, following on the $2 billion increase in FY 2016, have put the NIH on a path toward sustainable budget growth. These much-needed increases will help NIH address critical health problems and emerging challenges through cutting-edge research. The APS urges you to sustain this critical effort by increasing the NIH budget by another $2 billion in FY 2018. NSF: Time and time again we have seen that the knowledge gained through basic biological research is the foundation for more applied studies that sustain the health of animals, humans and ecosystems. NSF-funded research has led to countless new discoveries that could not have been envisioned when the research began and these unforeseen applications have had enormous impact on science, health and the world’s economy. The APS urges you to fund the FY 2018 NSF budget at a level of at least $8 billion to prevent further erosion of program capacity. VA: In recent years, Congress has increased funding for the VA Medical and Prosthetic Research Program, allowing clinicians and researchers to pursue new ideas that would otherwise go unexplored and expand research in promising areas of science. In order to build on this investment in the VA research enterprise, the APS urges Congress to provide $713 million for VA Research in FY 2018. This level of investment will allow the VA to maintain their current research program while pursuing new directions to address the needs of the veteran population. NASA: NASA sponsors research across a broad range of the basic and applied life sciences, including gravitational biology, biomedical research and the Human Research Program (HRP). The gravitational biology and biomedical research programs explore fundamental scientific questions through research carried out both on Earth and aboard the International Space Station, which provides an environment for the conduct of experiments in space. NASA’s HRP conducts focused research and develops countermeasures with the goal of enabling safe and productive human space exploration. The APS urges you to restore cuts to NASA’s life sciences research budgets and to increase funding for the Human Research Program.
Only if you are asked. . . .
We are NOT seeking Congressional action on indirect costs. This is background information in case the topic comes up in your meetings:
The President’s FY 2018 budget request for the NIH would limit future Facilities & Administrative (F&A) costs to 10% of the award. Currently, the average indirect cost rate for institutions receiving NIH funding is 28%. The APS has not taken a position on this issue, but here are some general comments you can make: • Indirect costs are provided to research institutions to reimburse them for overhead costs associated
with conducting federally sponsored research, such as building maintenance and utilities, disposal of hazardous waste, and the administrative costs of regulatory compliance.
• Each institution negotiates an indirect cost rate with the government.
• The Office of Management and Budget has strict rules concerning what costs grantees may pay using
both direct and indirect grant funds. While some foundations do provide a lower rate of indirect cost reimbursement, they also permit their grantees to cover certain overhead and administrative costs associated with their research using the grant funds themselves.
Impact of Federal Science Funding on San José State Students Federal science funding supports cutting edge research projects at SJSU as well as training programs to increase diversity in STEM fields. The NIH supported Maximizing Access to Research Careers (MARC) Program received a 50% budget cut in 2013 due to the sequester and its budget has not been restored. The Department of Education funds the similar McNair Scholars Program for first-generation and underrepresented students. This program is slated for elimination in President Trump’s budget. Below are stories about three students supported by federal science funding while working in just one lab at SJSU. As you will see, these students are the future of science and we need them working on questions of biomedical importance. Additionally, they bring a diverse perspective and are already acting as role models to other students. Supporting the next generation of diverse researchers is a smart investment and we hope Representative Lofgren will keep advocating for increased federal science funding.
Joy Franco (SJSU ’14, Mechanical Engineering PhD student, Stanford University) At SJSU Joy was supported by the NIH MARC Program and is currently supported by a prestigious National Science Foundation (NSF) Graduate Research Fellowship. Her research area is mechanobiology, or the study of how mechanical cues such as pushing or pulling influence biology. One of her projects includes using the mechanical properties of fertilized oocytes to predict the chance of a live birth occurring. Such information is particularly useful in in vitro Fertilization (IVF), where multiple gestations often occur due to limited clinical ability in predicting live birth. Her lab is about to start clinical trial on a medical device they developed. Joy credits the MARC program with helping her-a mechanical engineer-connect to biology and human disease, exposing her to research as a career option, and helping her get into Stanford. Joy is one of the few female mechanical engineers of color at Stanford and is very active in outreach with groups like the Society of Women Engineers.
Anusha Allawala (SJSU ’15; Biomedical Engineering PhD Student, Brown University) As an undergraduate at SJSU, Anusha was supported by an NSF research experiences for undergraduates summer program and the Department of Education’s McNair Scholars program. This year she won an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship to support her studies at Brown. After graduation, Anusha worked at a Bay Area startup, Circuit Therapeutics. This company is a spinoff from Stanford Professor Karl Deisseroth’s lab and is commercializing federally funded breakthroughs in the hopes of treating chronic pain and Parkinson’s Disease. This experience solidified Anusha’s interest in attending graduate school, where she plans to study neural engineering. As a first generation college student and recent immigrant, federal funding has been crucial in allowing Anusha to fulfill her dream of becoming a scientist.
Alejandro Lopez (SJSU ’16; Neuroscience PhD Student, Emory University) As an undergraduate at SJSU, Alex was supported by the NIH MARC program. Starting in the fall, he will be supported by an NIH Initiative to Maximize Student Development (IMSD) graduate training fellowship at Emory University. Alex worked on a range of projects at SJSU, including determining whether obesity can alter motor behavior and reflexes. This work has implications for understanding why people with obesity are much more likely to fall and experience debilitating injuries. One of the requirements of the MARC program is to spend a summer at a research intensive school. Alex went to Emory and loved the research and people he met there. As a PhD student, Alex plans to study ways to treat peripheral nerve injuries and other neurological conditions. Alex is a first-generation Mexican-American student who is passionate about both science and mentoring the next generation of scientists.
To Petition the Government for a redress of grievances
KevinM.WilsonASCBDirectorofPublicPolicyandMediaRela=ons
WhatistheASCB?
� ~6,000members
� All50statesandmorethan60countries
� Largestcellbiology-relatedsciencemee@ng
� Begantoexploresciencepolicyadvocacyasearlyas1979
� Startedaseriousjointeffortin1989:JSCPP,nowtheCLS
� ASCBPublicPolicyCommiNeein1989
TypesofASCBAdvocacy� Grassroots
� Policyalerts� NewsleNer� Takeac@on� changeinfocus
� Grasstops� NobelLaureates� Prominentlocalscien@sts
Hasadvocacybeensuccessful?� NIHDoubling(1997–2003)
� GingrichandClintonneededtoagreeonsomething
� EmbryonicStemCellResearch(2000’s)� Science,Pa@ents,Hollywood,Poli@cians� Time� Allaboutthescience
� GrowingsupportforNIHfunding� Ledbymoreconserva@vemembersoftheHouse� Allaboutthescience
Wherehasadvocacyfailed?� NIHPostDoublingFunding
� “NIHFa@gue”� Sciencenotimportantenough
� Soma@cCellNuclearTransfer(Cloning)� Notenough@me� Toomuchaboutthescience
� Fetal@ssueresearch� Neverenough@me� Toomuchaboutthescienceandabor@onpoli@cs
Whyissciencepolicyharder?� Collisionoflifescienceandsocialpolicy
� RecombinantDNAvs.embryonicstemcells
� FY18
� Generalsuspicionofscienceinpoli@cs
� Technologymakeadvocacyfreer&faster
� Everybodyisdoingadvocacynow
� Increaseinoveralladvocacyvolume
Toosuccessful� SomeCongressionalofficessawa1,000%increaseincons@tuentmailbetween2001and2011.
� Congresshasnotincreasedstaffsizesince1979.
EmailandPostalMailtoCongress,1995-2011
HowisCongressResponding?
� “Cons@tuentmailisatoppriority”� 95%ofSenatestaff� 89%ofHousestaff
� Increasedrelianceon“form”responses
� Increasedofficefocusonrespondingtomail
� Nomen@onofaddressingtheissues
HouseMassMail(1998-2008)andMassCommunicaAons(2009-2015)
MillionsofItemsofMassMailandMassCommunica@ons
Ifit’snotworking…
� Newadvocates
� Newwaysofadvocacy
� Newadvocacymessages
Crea@ngnewadvocates� Newadvocates
� Currently:scien@sts,someuniversi@es,somepa@entgroups� Future:awiderdefini@onofbeneficiariesofscience
� Newwaysofadvocacy� Newadvocacymessages
Whichisreal?
Crea@ngnewadvocates� Neighbors� Communityleaders� Otheruniversityemployees� Localmedia� Industry
� Labtours� Openhouses� Postersessions
Crea@ngnewwaysofadvocacy� Newadvocates� Newwaysofadvocacy
� Facetoface� Tours� Visual� Communitybased
� Newadvocacymessages
Crea@ngnewmessages� Newadvocates� Newwaysofadvocacy� Newadvocacymessages
� “It’simportanttometoo.”
Specificac@onstoconsider:
� Encourage/supportyourresearchers
� Teachadvocacytothenextgenera@on
� Beevenmoreopentothecommunity
� Reachouttoothercommuni@es
� Singleissuevisitsbyelectedofficials
� workwithgroupsalreadydoingadvocacy
Thank you!
How to Get Your Research Shared Online
@calstate
Elizabeth Chapin, Manager, Public Affairs Toni Molle, Director, Public Affairs
CSU Chancellor’s Office
EMBRACE SIMPLICITY
INVERTED PYRAMID
1. THE HEADLINE
2. SUMMARY
3. STATS
4. DETAILS AND FACTS • How? • What exactly are you doing • How will it (potentially) solve the problem?
• Funding? • Any other background important to reader?
5. ENDING Summary Quote ending “This generous grant from the NIH is a recognition of Dr. Borok’s
exceptional contributions to alveolar epithelial cell research, and it will enable her to chart new territory in this field of study.”
OR Future action pending If Goran’s hypothesis proves true, the study results could reshape dietary
recommendations for people who have fatty liver disease due to their genetic predisposition.
TIP #1: CUT UNNECESSARY WORDS
This paper provides a reviews of the basic tenets of cancer biology study design, using as examples studies that illustrate the methodologic challenges or that demonstrate successful and solutions to the difficulties inherent in biological research.
TIP #2:
JARGON
TIP #3: EMBRACE THE ACTIVE VOICE!
Active Voice: Dr. Salk discovered the
polio vaccine. Passive Voice: The polio vaccine was
discovered by Dr. Salk.
TIP #4: CAMPUS MEDIA RELATIONS
TIP #5: BE PRESENT ON SOCIAL MEDIA
TIP #6: SUPPLY VISUALS
QUESTIONS???
www.calstate.edu
CSUPERB 2017
Workshop: Creating an FCG Strike Force For Public Engagement
July 31, 2017 Office of the Chancellor
CSUPERB 2017
Principles for CSUPERB Workshops
• Dynamic and engaging • Part of the process – a means to an end, not the
end itself • Efficient and productive • People are there to develop content together • Exploring different options and possibilities • Unknowns to explore • Equal contributions, regardless of role
-- from: A Pocket Guide to Effective Workshops by Alison Coward
CSUPERB 2017
Alex Osborn’s original brainstorming rules and guidelines Principles • Defer judgment • Go for quantity Rules • Focus on quantity • Withhold criticism • Welcome unusual ideas • Combine and improve ideas
CSUPERB 2017
3 Essential Aspects of Design Thinking
• Empathy (human-centered) This morning’s presentations• Ideation (generating a lot of ideas)
• Experimentation Done Right, Design Thinking... • Captures the mindsets and needs of the people you're creating for. • Paints a picture of the opportunities based on the needs of these
people. • Can start to anchor your designs, programs and offerings. -- from: What is Design Thinking? IDEO; https://www.ideou.com/blogs/inspiration/what-is-design-thinking
The FCG “strike team” team work you’ll do back on campus
This afternoon’s workshop
CSUPERB 2017
Public engagement
with science describes intentional, meaningful interactions that provide opportunities for mutual learning between scientists and members of the public.
CSUPERB 2017
Public Engagement Framework
CSUPERB 2017
Q: What examples are you aware of where public engagement has benefitted scientific research?
CSUPERB 2017
The SPC’s Big Idea To Get Started: FCG teams can collect and broadcast positive impacts of campus biotech work and - at the same time - engage the public around STEM education, research and entrepreneurship. (and – individually - learn how to better “message”)
CSUPERB 2017
How might we best engage the public(s) around biotech / STEM education, research, and entrepreneurship?
• Empathy (this morning): Who are the people you want to communicate with?
What is a typical communication channel on your campus? + CSUPERB
• Ideation (this afternoon): How can we form strike teams on each campus? How can we make their job easy?
• Experiment during AY 17-18: What are we doing now? How can we scale it or improve it?
CSUPERB 2017
Braindump Exercise (20 minutes): What recent, biotech-related news can you think of that people off-campus might find interesting?
• Record one idea per post-it note – Work individually!
• As a team: Share out, look for patterns or themes
• Report out to Room: Identify themes
CSUPERB 2017
STEP ONE: Identify your Strike Team’s communication and engagement goal for this year Use AAAS Logic Model to help you fill in the blanks of this goal statement: “We want to (pick a short/medium/long term outcome) to better (vision)” Complete 2 Step One Worksheets (one for you; one for CSUPERB)
CSUPERB 2017
STEP TWO: Identify your Strike Team’s audience for this year Complete 2 Step Two Worksheets (one for you; one for CSUPERB)
CSUPERB 2017
Dr. K’s Messaging
• Look at her “Impact of Federal Science Funding on San José State Students” sheet
What do you think her three main messages are here?
CSUPERB 2017
STEP THREE: Create and tailor your Strike Team’s message for this year The main points we want to convey are (1), (2), (3)…. Complete 2 Step Three Worksheets (one for you; one for CSUPERB) – HOMEWORK?
CSUPERB 2017
STEP FOUR: Opportunities to Engage in AY 16-17 CSUPERB will help: Send Susan ([email protected]) short, tailored news items and we’ll post them on CSUPERB media (Website, Facebook, Newsletter, Twitter, share with PAs) – aim to send one every 6 weeks (~8 total)
CSUPERB 2017
NEXT STEPS
• Schedule a meeting with all FCG team members who want to get involved to discuss and refine 17-18 Public Engagement (PE) plan
• Consider rotating the PE writing assignment or calendaring when you’ll send news to CSUPERB
• Consider drafting a template for your strike team to re-use (to stay on message!)
• Decide whether you’ll try and include photos with your news
• Call CSUPERB if you have questions!
Summer 2017 Faculty Consensus Group (FCG) Program-At-A-Glance Charts Chancellor’s Office Long Beach July 31, 2017
Upcoming Grant Proposal DeadlinesCSU I-Corps Microgrants – Fall 2017 Call for Teams
• RFP Release: January, 2017• Proposal Deadline: Rolling until August 28, 2017
• Review & Decisions within 3 weeks of application receipt
Howell-CSUPERB Research Scholars• RFP Release: August, 2017 • Proposal Deadline: October 16, 2017 • Award Notifications: December, 2017
Faculty & Student Travel Grant Programs (Fall & Spring)• RFP Release: Fall - August, 2017 Spring - February, 2018 • Proposal Deadline: Fall – October 9, 2017 Spring - March 12, 2018 • Review: Fall – November, 2017 Spring - April, 2018 • Award Notifications: Fall – December, 2017 Spring - May, 2018
New Investigator, Research Development, Joint Venture & Curriculum Development • RFP Release: August, 2017 • Proposal Deadline: February 5, 2018 • Review Meeting: April 14, 2018 • Award Notifications: May, 2018
Presidents’ Commission Scholars Program• RFP Release: August, 2017 • Proposal Deadline: February 19, 2018 • Review: March, 2018 • Award Notifications: April, 2018
Seed Grant in-person peer review meetings will be held in the San Francisco Bay area. Specific location TBD.
CSUPERB Summer 2017
30th Annual CSU Biotechnology Symposium
Santa Clara Marriott, January 11-13, 2018
CSUPERB Summer 2017
CSUPERB Actual Expense/Budget Trend ~ Flat
CSUPERB Summer 2017
-
400,000
800,000
1,200,000
1,600,000
2,000,000
FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 FY 13/14 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 (budget)
Total Expenditures ($) with Sponsored ProgramsSponsored Program SupportGrants & Taskforce Operations
$
Who are we? Student Researchers
Student Symposium Registrants’ answers to “How many academic terms have you spent working in a research lab?” (all students present research posters or I-Corps lessons learned talks at the symposium)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
1 academic term 2-3 academic terms
More than 3 academic terms
More than 5 academic terms
2013
2014
2015
2016
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
Attend graduate school for a master's degree (MS / MA / PSM) in a biotechnology-related field
Attend graduate school for a Ph.D. degree in a biotechnology-related field
Attend graduate school for a professional degree such as law or business
Attend graduate school for a professional healthcare degree (nursing / clinical laboratory
sciences / occupational therapy / etc.)
Attend medical / dental / pharmacy / veterinary school working toward a M.D. / DVM / PharmD or
MD/PhD degree
Find a biotechnology-related job and work for a couple of years before going back to school for my
M.D. / Ph.D. / or other professional degree
Find a biotechnology-related job working at a company / a national lab / or a university (includes
postdoc appointments)
Teach or go to graduate school to earn a teaching certification
Find a job in a career unrelated to biotechnology
Other (Active Duty Military, Start a Company, Join Peace Corps / Americorps, etc.)
I don't know yet
2013
2014
2015
2016
Student Career Aspirations,based on responses from students registering for 29th (2017) symposium (n = 438)
Who are we? Student Researchers at Symposium
n = 424 at 2017 (most ever)but not quite matched with overall CSU student demographics
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
American Indian
African American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Hispanic / Latina/o
Other/Two or More Races / Decline to state
White or Caucasian
Fall 2016 CSU Enrollment
2016
2015
2014
2013
Who are we? (A Renewing Community) • 37% of faculty/staff symposium participants at the 2017 CSU Biotechnology
Symposium were assistant professors – so word about CSUPERB is getting out to new faculty (thanks to FCG networks on campus!)
• 24% of the faculty/staff 2017 symposium participants were attending for the first time!
*On average 61% (~100/year) faculty/staff participants respond to post-symposium survey
% Faculty/Staff Reporting (Post-Symposium Survey, 2010-2017)
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
More than 10 times
5 - 10 times
2 - 5 times
1 time
This was my first time attending
CSUPERB Summer 2017
Who are we? (~50% faculty members answering post-symposium survey have external funding)
*On average 56% (~140/year) faculty/staff participants respond to post-symposium survey
*Self-reported answers to the question,” On average, what is the average, annual operating cost ($) of running your CSU lab/group?
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%
2011 2013 2015 2017
< $10k$10-50k$50-100k>$100k
CSUPERB Summer 2017
Would you recommend the CSU Biotechnology Symposium to other students in the future?
ß 2017 Student Responses (41% response rate)
ß 2017 Faculty Responses (66% response rate)
Would you recommend the CSU Biotechnology Symposium to other faculty in the future?
ß Faculty Responses 95.0%
96.0%
97.0%
98.0%
99.0%
100.0%
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
95.0%
96.0%
97.0%
98.0%
99.0%
100.0%
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
95.0%
96.0%
97.0%
98.0%
99.0%
100.0%
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
CSUPERB Summer 2017
2017 Symposium Reviews
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Very Dissatisfied
Dissatisfied
Neutral / Not Sure
Satisfied
Very Satisfied
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Very Dissatisfied
Dissatisfied
Neutral / Not Sure
Satisfied
Very Satisfied
Student Responses
(n=179)
FacultyResponses
(n=96)
CSUPERB Summer 2017
We received a record level of poster abstracts for review in 2017 (n = 397; >10% increase year over year) 2017 poster acceptance rate = 73% (74% in 2016)
CSUPERB Summer 2017
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2014 2015 2016 2017
# Poster Abstracts Accepted
# Poster Abstracts Submitted
# Participants Total
CSUPERB Proposal Review Panel Composition (2016-17)
CSUPERB Summer 2017
Success Rates - Seed grants only (FS, JV, CD)Success rate (29%) = (35 awards made ÷ 120 applications received) × 100
AY 16/17 success rate for all CSUPERB grant programs combined is 29% (it was 28% in 15/16)
CSUPERB Summer 2017
Breakdown of Applications in Seed Grant Program Categories
New Investigator (NI) applications remained strong in AY 16/17. 74 NI proposals received this year vs. 83 in AY 15/16.
CSUPERB Summer 2017
Campus Participation Averaged participation across programs (AY 06/07 – AY16/17)
CSUPERB Summer 2017
0
5
10
15
20
Resea
rch Se
ed (N
I + RD)
Joint
Ventu
re
Curricu
lum D
ev.
Trave
l Gran
ts
Howell
Awards
PC Sc
holar
s
Eden
Award
Nagel
Award
Pauli
ng Award
I2P Biot
ech C
halle
nge
Studen
t I-Corp
s
Facu
lty I-C
orps
Andreo
li Award
Fac.
Res. A
ward
Sympos
ium
Average Number
Campuses Participating
Per Year (2006-2017)
CSUPERB Program
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
AY04/05 AY05/06 AY06/07 AY07/08 AY08/09 AY09/10 AY10/11 AY11/12 AY12/13 AY13/14 AY14/15
Dollars ($), Received by CSUPERB PIs
Academic Year
Total CSUPERB Grant Dollars Awarded (FS, JV, NI, PR, RD only)
Financial Return-on-Investment (Total Follow-on Funding to CSUPERB PIs)
Follow-on funding received by CSUPERB PIs 14.5X averaged fiscal “return-on-investment” over 10-year window (2005-2015) Figures based on final and long-term reporting by CSUPERB PIs
Several large program grants awarded across CSU (CIRM Bridges, NIH, ARRA, etc.)
Includes $17M NIH grant to a JV awardee
CSUPERB Summer 2017
Competitive CSUPERB Funding by CSU Campus AY 16-17 This chart summarizes CSUPERB financial support in the form of competitive grants, awards, and symposium expenses (in dollars, $) by campus. 21 campuses won grants and awards this year; 22 campuses were represented at the Annual Biotechnology Symposium.
$0 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000
StanislausSonoma
San MarcosSan Luis Obispo
San José San Francisco
San Diego San Bernardino
SacramentoPomona
NorthridgeMonterey Bay
Maritime AcademyLos AngelesLong Beach
HumboldtFullerton
FresnoEast Bay
Dominguez HillsChico
Channel IslandsBakersfield
Total Funding (Dollars to Campus) Additional Dollars Requested, but Unfunded
CSUPERB Summer 2017
