• Home
• About Us
• Services
• Resources
• Contact Us

Resource 2.   Federal R&D Funding: Quick Agency Profiles

THE FEDERAL FUNDING LANDSCAPE IS COMPLEX AND EVER-CHANGING.  HERE, WE DRILL DOWN AND PROVIDE BRIEF, UP-TO-DATE PROFILES ON US AGENCIES THAT AWARD MAJOR R&D GRANTS AND CONTRACTS.  THIS PAGE IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR DETAILED AGENCY AND CENTRALIZED WEBSITES, BUT HERE YOU WILL QUICKLY FIND KEY FACTS - BUDGET SIZE, WHERE THE MONEY GOES, TRENDS, AND PRIORITIES.  WE DRAW HEAVILY  FROM RECENT AAAS SCIENCE AND POLICY ANALYSES FOR THESE PROFILES.

.

 

 

Overview - How much does the federal overnment spend on R&D and where do the dollars go? 

 

This is a confusing question as there are many categories of research and development and many ways to look at spending.  Let’s work through the numbers estimated for 2010 (based on the AAAS Report XXXIV – Research and Development FY 2010).

 

The total US research and development budget for 2010 is estimated at $147.5B, a 0.3% increase from 2009.  About $81B is classified as “development”.  $59.3B is classified as “research”, including “basic” and “applied” research.  The latter “research” amount is what is shown in Figure 1 for the period 1976-2009.  (Note that change in the research funding landscape tends to be very incremental from year to year.  An exception was the period 1998-2003 when the budget of the NIH doubled).  The difference between “research” + “development” and the $147.5B grand total (a few billion) goes toward funding of “R&D facilities” such as the International Space Station (NASA). 

 

2010 comes on the heels of a very unusual year.  Passage of the economic stimulus appropriations bill on Feb 17, 2009 resulted in a one-time infusion of $18.4B of additional R&D funds, mainly to NIH, NSF, and DOE.  We will not address spillover Recovery Act impacts on the 2010 R&D budget in the discussions below.

 

All of these numbers can be couched, of course, in terms of the country’s overall budget of $3.6 trillion dollars.

 

Another way to look at science spending is to lump “research” and “development” together, but segregate defense from non-defense spending.  From this perspective, non-defense R&D spending is projected to be about $63B and defense-related spending about $84B.  $84B exceeds the DoD’s proposed 2009 budget of $80.0B because defense-related spending is also undertaken by DOE and the Department of Homeland Security. 

 

The main issue for those of you reading this explanation is probably, what are the science (and non-science) budgets available for external investigators and contractors?  In other words, most of us know that NSF and NIH give most of their R&D budgets away in the form of competitive awards and contracts, but what about agencies like DOD, NASA, DOE, and USDA? 

 

The answer depends a great deal on the agency – its mission, history, and political health.  We attempt to provide more information of this flavor in the quick agency profiles below. AAAS tends to look at things from the investigator vantage point since much of AAAS’ membership depends on grants and contracts for survival, but AAAS is biased towards "research". Certainly in the "development" category, major funding also flows to non-governmental organizations, large and small, to execute projects.

 

For a more in-depth treatment of the nation's R&D budget outlook for 2010, go to AAAS Report XXXIV – Research and Development FY 2010. (Please note - many of the graphs below are still being updated from 2009.)

 

The table below gives a picture of the nation’s spending in science across its largest agencies (from AAAS Report XXXIV).  Here are a couple of interesting observations:

• The total non-defense R&D expenditure budgeted for 2010, $63.5B, is about 1.8% of the nation's total 2010 budget of $3.6B.
• Reflecting Congress’ (and the American public’s) priority on health care, NIH's 27 institutes receive nearly half of the total non-defense R&D budget.

 

FEDERAL AGENCY (all figures in millions)	FY 2008 (actual)	FY 2009 (est)	FY 2010  Budgeted	% Change – 2009 to 2010
Defense	81,166	81,959	79,989	-2.4
S&T (6.1-6.3 + medical)	13,045	14,537	12,263	-15.5
All other DOD R&D	68,122	67,421	67,727	0.5
Health and Human Services	29,250	30,413	30,935	1.7
NIH	28,532	29,747	30,184	1.5
NASA	11,183	10,547	11,194	6.1
Department of Energy	9,769	10,163	10,671	5.0
Atomic Energy Defense	3,963	3,750	4,004	6.8
Office of Science	3,807	4,326	4,468	3.3
Energy R&D	1,999	2,087	2,199	5.4
Natonal Science Foundation	4,506	4,833	5,290	9.5
Agriculture	2,332	2,402	2,243	-6.6
Commerce	1,180	1,292	1,330	2.9
NOAA	626	700	644	-8.0
NIST	498	550	637	15.8
Veterans Affaris	886	1,020	1,160	13.7
Homeland Security	995	1,096	1,125	2.6
Transportation	875	913	939	2.8
Interior	683	693	730	5.4
EPA	548	563	587	4.4
Education	313	323	384	18.9
Smithsonian	194	232	224	-3.4
Housing and Urban Development	50	58	170	193.1
International Assistance Programs	152	152	152	0
State	103	103	103	0
Nuclear Regulatory Commission	71	71	91	28.2
Justice	81	85	78	-8.2
Social Security	27	35	49	40
Postal Service	43	43	43	0
Tennessee Valley Authority	20	18	15	-16.7
Corps of Engineers	11	11	11	0
Telecomm Development	5	6	7	16.7
Labor	4	4	4	0
Total	144,448	147,033	147,525	0.3
Defense R&D	85,129	85,709	83,993	-2.0
Non-Defense R&D	59,318	61,325	63,531	3.6

Table 1.  US R&D budget for FYs 2008-2009-2010 (from AAAS)


Figure 1


Figure 2

Back to Top

Deciphering the Department of Defense DOD’s overall budget is nearly $670B or nearly 1/5 of the entire national budget.  The DOD’s projected 2010 R&D budget is $80.0B, a decline of about 2.4% from 2009.  DOD is easily the largest sponsor of R&D in the federal system.   By far, most of the R&D budget is to support weapons development programs – around $68B. The so-called Science and Technology (S&T) portion of the budget is the difference – around $12.3B (S&T = 6.1+6.2+6.3+medical – see 4th bullet). Generally, Congress has been more supportive of a healthy DOD S&T budget than the Pentagon.  There has been discussion of fixing the 6.1 portion of the S&T budget at 3% of DOD’s overall R&D budget, but this target has never yet been reached.   DOD’s interest in scientific and engineering disciplines is comprehensive and includes medical research ($536M in 2008). To understand DOD’s spending priorities, one must understand its numerical lingo.  DOD S&T encompasses three classes of R&D: 6.1 – Basic Research, 6.2 – Applied Research, and 6.3 -  Advanced Technology Development.  6.1 and 6.2 are research categories whereas 6.3 embraces development.  Other development categories include: 6.4 – Demonstration and Validation, 6.5 – Engineering and Manufacturing Development, 6.6 – RDT&E Management and Support, and 6.7 – Operational System Development. You can access a handy summary table from a RAND report  at RAND 1194 monograph. Historical defense expenditures in S&T and Development are shown in Figure 1. Defense expenditures by the DOE and DHS are included in this graphic.  In Figure 2, you may view how these funds have been partitioned between military branches (i.e. Air Force, Navy, Army) and a few DOD Agencies (Missile Defense and DARPA). The 2010 S&T budget will look like the following: 6.1 @ $1.8B, 6.2 @ $4.2B, and 6.3+medical @ $6.3B.  The Pentagon’s request for Medical research funding will continue to fall sharply and even earmarked programs may not survive in 2010. (see Figure 3). DOD’s Defense Agencies budget will drop to $20.8B – a 5.2% reduction.  MDA (Missile Defense Agency) would receive $7.1B, DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) $3.3B, CBDP (Chemical and Biological Defense Program) $1.2B, and DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency) $0.51B. Nearly all R&D in categories 6.4 and higher is executed by large private contractors (Lockheed Martin, Boeing, SAIC, etc.).  If we exclude development activities, the 6.1+6.2 S&T pot of $6.0B funds a variety of players (Figure 3).  Roughly 40% of this work is done by industry, 33% by DOD labs, and 21% by universities.  Five states receive about half of DOD’s R&D outflow, chiefly by virtue of being home to large defense contractors (CA, TX, MA, VA, MD).  Virginia and Maryland benefit through proximity to the Pentagon and their housing a high density of DOD labs and federally funded R&D centers. Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4                                                                                 Back to Top NIH profile in funding health science R&D The National Institutes of Health comprise 27 Institutes and Centers. NIH's budget, projected at $31.0B in 2010 (an increase of 1.4%, not including ARRA funds), is spread out accordingly.  97% of the budget is dedicated to R&D and 3% is allocated to overhead costs and research training.  Funding by general institute and funding mechanism categories is shown in Figures 1 and 2 below. The NIH is the second-largest supporter of R&D in the federal government (Department of Defense is number one) and the largest federal sponsor of R&D at colleges and universities.  NIH received $10.4 billion from the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and many of these funds will be spent through FY 2010. The majority of NIH funds are competitively awarded to external investigators through Research Project Grants (RPGs - see figure below). NIH projects about 36,182 RPGs in 2010 worth $15,7B, of which 9,849 would be new.  The average RPG award size is about $400K and project duration is 3.7 years (see Figure 3).  About 11% of NIH’s budget is awarded through R&D contracts (Figure 2).  R&D contract funding grew rapidly between 2001-2004 to fund biodefense research. NIH also operates its own sizeable research laboratories, mostly in Bethesda, MD. Spending on Intramural research may total $3.2 billion in 2010. Per the agency’s Roadmap for Biomedical Research, NIH priorities focus on clinical research, high-risk basic research, new research tools, and multidisciplinary collaborative research.  Biodefense R&D (approx $1.7B) and  HIV/AIDS research (approx $2.9B) continue to be NIH priorities.  The Obama Administration has added cancer (>$6B expected collective expenditure) and autism ($141M) as research priorities. Success rates for new grant applications have fallen to about 20 percent in recent years from a high of 32 percent in FY 2001 (Figure 3).  The impact of the frenzied competition over Recovery Act funds in 2009/2010 remains to be seen. NIH expenditure for multidisciplinary centers (now 1,437) continues to increase (about $3.1B/year or 10% of overall budget). Although NIH dominates the Health and Human Servcies R&D portfolio, other HHS agencies (excluding NIH) will fund a still substantial $751 million of R&D in FY 2010..  Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 3.                                                                                 Back to Top What is NSF’s role in funding science research? With a total 2010 budget of $7.0B (8.5% above FY 2009 not including ARRA funds), NSF is the only federal agency with responsibility for all science and engineering disciplines (see Figure 1 below).  In broad terms, the (1) physical sciences, (2) environmental sciences, (3) engineering, (4) mathematics/computer sciences, and (5) life sciences receive comparable shares of NSF funding.  NSF is second to NIH in support to academic R&D.  NSF received $3B as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act that was obligated by September 30, 2010.   NSF has no laboratories of its own; 80% of its budget goes to universities and colleges – the highest proportion of any federal agency. 90% of NSF funding is awarded via a merit-based award process. NSF estimates that it will provide 12,850 competitive awards and 8,200 research grants in FY 2010. This represents a funding rate of 26% for competitive awards and 22% for research grant proposals. The Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC) program would be funded at $117M, a decrease of $35M; however, MREFC received $400 million in ARRA funding. Due to their high concentration of research universities and government-owned entities such as NCAR, seven states receive over 50% of all NSF grants (CA, NY, MA, CO, IL, VA, PA – see Figure 3). To address the imbalance, NSF created the EPSCoR Program (Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research) to help 25 states become more competitive. 2009-2010 will be good years for NSF, however, it remains to be seen whether the intent of the America Competes Act passed in 2007 to double NSF’s (and DOE’s and NIST’s core research) budget in ten years will come to fruition. Figure 1 Figure 2  Figure 3

Back to Top How will NASA execute R&D given its substantial $18.7B budget?   In terms of national impact on research, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration funds about 16 percent of all federal support for engineering research and 7 percent of all federal support for basic and applied research. With a proposed total budget of $18.7B in 2010 (over three times that of NSF), one might expect these proportions to be larger. But the R&D share of the total NASA budget is only about 2/3 of the total budget, and only $4.5B is for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate. Much of NASA’s budget is for large program development (e.g. $3.5B for the Constellation Systems program and $2.3B for the International Space Station). Accordingly, industry executes nearly half of NASA’s R&D (Figure 2).  NASA’s own labs (including the contractor-operated JPL) execute another 33% of the NASA R&D portfolio.The amount funneled to universities continues to shrink ($1.3B in 2007), but NASA still ranks fourth behind NIH, NSF, and DOD in sponsorship of academic research. NASA research is focused on engineering (1/3 of total), environmental sciences (1/4 of total), and physical sciences. Favored engineering sub-fields include aero- and astronomical engineering. In environmental sciences, significant funds flow to oceanography and atmospheric and geological sciences. Investment in the physical sciences favors astronomy, chemistry, and physics. The FY 2010 budget reflects the President Obama’s continued support for the U.S. Space Exploration Policy conceived under the Bush Administration that aims to complete assembly of the International Space Station by 2010; retire the Space Shuttle in 2010; return astronauts to the Moon by the end of the next decade; and eventually send human explorers to Mars and beyond. This focus on exploration continues to raise concerns from NASA constituent groups, such as those serving the aeronautics and science mission directorates, that the Moon and Mars initiatives are being planned without significant new funding for NASA.    Figure 1 Figure 2                                                                                 Back to Top Department of Energy - R&D funding on the rise   DOE is the #1 federal sponsor of the physical sciences, supplying nearly half of all federal supporting this science category. DOE alone funds nearly 2/3 of all federally-supported physics research. DOE R&D also favors computer sciences, mathematics, and engineering research in materials science and nanotechnology. DOE’s R&D budget will climb 5% to $10.7B in 2010 if congressional appropriations are not undercut (overall agency budget is $26.4B). DOE was a prime beneficiary of 2009 ARRA funding ($2.4B - $1.6B of this for R&D) and it continues to benefit by virtue of being one of the three agencies designated by the American Competitiveness Initiative to receive enhanced funding in the physical sciences (along with NSFand NIST). DOE’s budget is divided into three categories: Science (target $4.5B in 2010), Energy ($2.2B), and Defense ($4.0B). (Figure 1) Major Science thrusts in 2010 include Basic Energy Sciences ($1.7B), High Energy Physics ($819M), fusion research ($421M; note: the US commitment to ITER was largely killed in 2008), and Advanced Scientific Computing Research ($409M). (Figure 2) In Energy, key R&D areas include energy efficiency and renewable energy ($950M for fuel cell, biomass, solar, geothermal, water, wind, vehicle/bldg/industrial technologies – priorities of many of these programs have changed), nuclear energy ($562M, down 14%), and fossil fuels ($469M, down 4.5%, but largely compensated for by ARRA funds). Defense R&D spending is mainly in the area of atomic energy defense ($4.0B – weapons stockpile management, navy reactors, environmental consequences, and advanced computer simulation of nuclear explosions)   DOE’s dominance in the physical sciences may not be appreciated by all because roughly half of its Science R&D funding goes to operate and construct facilities at federal laboratories that are contractor-operated (e.g. ORNL, BNL, ANL), while the other half supports research, also mostly at DOE laboratories. In 2004, 18% of DOE’s $3.5B Office of Science budget, or $626M, went to universities and colleges.

Figure 1

 Figure 2

Back to Top

US Department of Agriculture

With a proposed 2010 R&D budget of $2.24B, the USDA is the 6^th largest sponsor of research and development in the federal government. USDA supports over 90% of the total federal outlay for agricultural sciences. Other notable areas of emphasis include environmental biology and economics (latter through the ERS – Economic Research Service).

 

• USDA’s three largest service entities are: the Agricultural Research Service (ARS), the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES), and the Forest Service (see Figure 1 for history of funding for these services).  By Sep 30, 2010, CSREES will change its name to the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA).  
• Nearly all R&D conducted by ARS, the Economic Research Service (ERS), and the Forest Service is intramural – that it, it is performed by USDA staff at USDA facilities. This combined expenditure accounts for over 2/3 of the $2.24B R&D budget.  Extramural R&D is administered mainly by NIFA through appropriation to land-grant universities ($225M) and the American Food Research Institute (AFRI) - the principal competitive grants program of USDA ($202M) (see Figure 2).  A push to move USDA away from so-called “formula funding” and toward more AFRI competitive awards has again been stifled as AFRI funding remains static.
• USDA is focused on three major initiatives: (1) The Organic Agriculture Research and Extension Initiative ($20M) which has grown from a $3M start in 2008; (2) Biomass Research and Development ($28M) for research to be conducted jointly with DOE to look at feedstocks development, biofuels, and biobased (again rapid growth from a $2M budget in 2008); and (3) the Specialty Crop Research Initiative Program (SCRI) ($50M) to address critical needs of the specialty crop industry through multi-state, multi-institutional, or transdisciplinary projects (the SCRI received $30M in mandatory funding in FY2008; $50M would be made available for the program through FY 2012).

 

Figure 1

Figure 2

Back to Top

Department of Homeland Security - Big money but growing pains

Formed in response to the terrorist strike in the US in 2001, DHS has become the government’s 7^th largest R&D funding agency.  The overall budget proposed for DHS in 2010 is a very substantial $55.1B, but only $1.13B is designated for R&D.  The $1.13B figure represents a 2.6% increase over FY2009.  The components of the $1.0B FY2009 budget can be seen in Figure 1.

 

• Like the DOD, DHS funds R&D across a very broad swath of technical disciplines, with particular emphasis on life sciences and engineering to address biological countermeasures.  The DHS research budget which excludes development, is proposed to be $0.4B and the split by discipline for research alone is shown in Figure 2.
• As a relatively new entity, DHS has seen its budget fluctuate due to rapid growth and dissatisfaction on the part of Congress that the agency did not manage this explosive growth well in terms of staffing, spending, and planning.  As a result, projected R&D funding levels for 2010 reflect a decline from peak appropriations in 2005-2006 and there is a risk that the agency will suffer further cutbacks (see Figure 3).
• The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office would receive the largest cut of 2010 DHS R&D funds, $277M, mainly to develop radiological and nuclear countermeasures.  This program and emphasis on physical sciences will likely continue to grow at the expense of life sciences and focus on biological countermeasures.
• The chemical and biological countermeasures portfolio, which remains part of the S&T directorate, would receive $207 million, a 3.2 percent increase from the current year and would remain the second-largest part of the DHS R&D portfolio.
• Construction of the National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center (NBACC) was completed in 2009.  NBACC is a biodefense complex of DHS, NIH, and DOD facilities at Fort Detrick, MD. DHS’ FY 2010 Laboratory Facilities request of $155M would be used to support operations and management of the facility.
• In terms of execution (Figure 4), roughly equal thirds of the $1.0B budget will go to industry, intramural programs, and federally-funded R&D Centers (i.e. national labs, especially those connected with DOE).  Only a few percent ($33M or 3%) flowed to universities in 2007 and most of this is for 13 Centers of Excellence.  The University Programs budget in 2010 is $46M – a decline of $4M from 2009. 

 

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Back to Top

Department of Commerce R&D explained

 

The US Department of Commerce is perhaps one of the most difficult federal agencies to describe and to understand. A cabinet department (i.e. reports directly to President), Commerce administers over 100 programs with diverse functions including census, economic development, weather, travel and tourism, atmospheric and ocean research, technology policy and information dissemination, telecomm, export administration, patents and trademarks, and more. The complexity of Commerce’s organization and overlaps with numerous other federal agencies, in fact, led to a congressional movement in the mid-1990s to dismantle this agency.

 

President Obama’s FY 2010 budget for the Department of Commerce requests over $8B. Of this, the amount allocated for R&D is $1.3B, a 2.9% increase. The lion’s share of these R&D dollars are administered by two entities – the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2010 overall budget request $4.48B; R&D budget @ $644M - a decline of 8%) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (R&D budget @ $637M – an increase of 15.8%). Almost 80% of total R&D funds are spent within NOAA and NIST laboratories. 19% is farmed out to universities, mainly by NOAA. 

 

The Department’s R&D budget has been in decline since 2002 (Figure 1), though NIST is recovering as a result of the American Competitiveness Initiative (also see DOE and NSF – goal is to double the budgets of these three agencies by 2016). NOAA and NIST have very different missions, and so let’s treat them separately below.

 

NOAA

• NOAA’s lead directorates include the National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS), National Weather Service (NWS), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Ocean Service (NOS), and the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR).  The R&D emphasis is on environmental (e.g. oceanography, atmospheric science), and life sciences (e.g. fisheries, biology, marine mammals). Historical expenditures in these and other science and engineering categories are shown in Figure 2.
• NOAA claims that decreases from FY 2009 omnibus funding levels in the research and climate,
• ocean and coast, and program support activities reflect reductions to facilities that received some of NOAA’s $830 million in stimulus funding and removal of congressional earmarks. Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) would decline $4 million from FY 2009 levels to $404 million and funding for the National Ocean Service would drop about 10 percent to $507 million.
• Increases are allotted for initiatives on ocean acidification, drought early warning, models for decadal climate predictions, and priorities in the Ocean Research Priorities Plan.
• NOAA intramural activity is concentrated in Maryland, Colorado, Washington, and California where major NOAA R&D centers are found.

 

NIST

• NIST’s research portfolio embraces a broad array of physical sciences, engineering, and computer sciences – hence, the inclusion of NIST in the President’s American Competitiveness Initiative. 
• NIST’s Scientific and Technical Research and Services (STRS) budget would increase more than 13 percent to $534.6M, with the R&D portion rising a similar percentage from $412M to $471M. Construction funding for NIST research facilities appears to fall 32% to $117M, but the decrease reflects the omission of FY 2009 funding of $44M for earmarked projects and $30M for a new competitive grant program for non-NIST facilities.
• President Obama did not continue President Bush’s efforts to end the Technology Innovation Program (TIP), formerly known as the NIST Advanced Technology Program (ATP). Instead, the FY 2010 request includes $70M for the program, an increase of 7.5%.
• Likewise, the Obama Administration reversed the previous administration’s goal of eliminating funding for the non-R&D Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) and instead put the program on a doubling track with a request of $125M, an increase of $15M over FY 2009. MEP is a program to operate a nationwide network of extension centers to disseminate better manufacturing technologies to small- and mediumsized manufacturers on a cost-shared basis with state governments and with users.
• NIST’s 2010 proposed robust budget would augment intramural support levels for newer initiatives in nanotechnology for environmental health and safety measurements, biosciences measurements and standards, cybersecurity, and optical communications and computing. The increase would also increase current NIST efforts in areas such as neutron research, quantum information science, and climate change measurements. NIST labs are concentrated in Maryland and Colorado.

 

Figure 1

Figure 2

Back to Top

Department of Veterans Affairs

 

Though the VA’s projected $1.16B R&D budget for 2010 (an increase of 13.7%; overall VA budget is $113B) places this federal agency in the top 10, it is one of the lesser known players because 100% of these funds must take place in VA hospitals and laboratories. Furthermore, all scientists and engineers who receive funding must be employees of the VA. 

 

• The VA’s budget has been relatively flat since 1990 (Figure 1). The apparent bump in 1997 resulted from a bookkeeping decision that year to include support, salary, and infrastructure costs as part of the agency’s R&D budget.
• Over half of the VA’s R&D budget goes toward investigator-initiated projects. The remainder funds a mix of centers, career development, and service directed research. The VA estimates that 2,350 projects will be funded in 2010.
• The VA’s R&D program is divided into four areas: (1)  biomedical laboratory science ($326M), (2) rehabilitation research ($72M), (3) health services research ($86M), and (4) clinical science ($96M). Perhaps best known is the rehabilitation research program, the goal of which is to improve the quality of life for disabled veterans with emphasis on advanced prosthetics. Support costs bring the projected total budget to $1.16M.
• VA investigators also compete for funds from federal, foundation, and industry sources. It is estimated that the VA would receive approximately $774 million for R&D in grants from non-government sources and other agencies, including the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Defense, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Including this amount would bring the total VA 2010 R&D portfolio to $1.9B

 

Figure 1

Back to Top

Department of Interior

 

The Department of the Interior operates on a $10+B annual budget to oversee recreation, wildlife conservation, and resource usage in one out of every 5 acres of land in the United States. DOI is a rare entity among federal agencies in that it raises more in revenue than it spends. Annually, over $18B is raised as a result of sale of drilling lease rights for oil and gas, supplying of water in the American west, and collection of recreational fees. Projected expenditure on R&D in 2010 is $730M, an increase of 5.4% from 2009, though the R&D spending trend for this agency has declined steadily since the early 1990s. Interior’s R&D mission is largely carried out by the US Geological Survey, but other familiar names include the Minerals Management Service (MMS), Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, US Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Parks Service. 

 

DOI was the recipient of $140M from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) for facility renovation and construction and for seismic and volcanic monitoring systems.

 

Let’s take a closer look at USGS and then also consider several of the smaller DOI agencies that also conduct research.

 

US Geological Survey

 

USGS’s total budget for 2010 is $1.1B – a 5.2% increase from 2009. About half is allocated to R&D; the other half supports data gathering and dissemination, facilities, mapping, and natural hazards reduction. The USGS FY 2010 R&D request for $649M represents the lion’s share of DOIs total expected R&D allocation. It also reflects a 6.2% increase from 2009.  

 

• As its name implies, the emphasis at USGS is on earth sciences research. This mission is executed by four divisions: (1) The Geologic Hazards, Resources, and Processes ($220M); (2) Water Resources Investigations ($124M); (3) Biological Research ($199M); and (4) Global Change Research ($58.2M – a huge jump of 43% over 2009).  Only the Global Change division, created by Congress in 2008, will see an increase over 2008 levels. 
• About 84% of DOI’s R&D is performed internally, 8% by universities, and 8% by a combination of industry, state governments, and nonprofits.

 

Minerals Management Service

 

MMS is an example of a lesser known federal agency that is playing a relatively larger role in grants and contracts solicitations over the past two years.  With driver here is domestic energy production and what people are willing to do to increase it.  Expanded drilling in sensitive coastal waters and unknowns associated with offshore alternative energy production will potentially require huge investments of R&D to establish basic feasibility and protect the environment. 

 

• The MMS 2010 R&D budget is $41M – up $5M from 2009 and over twice the $17M allocated in 2008. 
• At present, MMS is one of few major revenue sources for the federal government based on its leasing of drilling rights both on- and offshore.  Tens of billions in oil and gas contracts have been sealed in Gulf of Mexico and Alaska waters within recent years (eastern Gulf in deeper water, Chukchi and Beaufort Seas).  The main question is whether the federal and state governments and the public, will push for opening up of coastal zones (atlantic seaboard, Pacific coast, west FL) that have been considered off-limits for decades.  Another consideration is the development of offshore alternative energy (i.e. wind, wave, solar, hydrogen, thermal gradient, current).  The Cape Wind Project off Nantucket Island, MA is an early example of what can be done.

 

National Park Service

• The NPS 2010 R&D budget stays flat at $19M

Bureau of Reclamation

• R&D funding for this bureau is down by $5M to $13M in 2010

Bureau of Land Management

• The BLM 2010 R&D budget is $8M – unchanged from 2009.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Back to Top

Environmental Protection Agency funding turns the corner

 

The EPA is America’s primary regulatory agency for the environment. EPA’s FY 2010 budget requests $10.5B, 5.6% or $587M of which would go toward R&D. This represents a huge budget increase of more than one third compared to FY 2009 and comes after many years of declining budgets. Much of the increase would go to state activities supporting clean drinking water and wastewater, two priorities that also consumed the bulk of EPA’s $7.2 billion ARRA funding.

• EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD) manages all R&D dollars going to EPA labs and to external recipients. R&D dollars comprise 2/3 of EPA’s $842M Science and Technology budget, with the other third going to tasks including infrastructure protection, overhead, and clean air standards and certification activities. $27M of ORD’s total is expected to come from the Superfund program.
• Major EPA Programs include: Human Health and Ecosystems ($245M), Clean Water ($110M), Clean Air ($104M), Homeland Security ($34M), Pesticides and Toxics ($28M), Sustainability ($24M) and Land Protection ($14M).  All program budgets but Homeland Security are expected to increase relative to 2009.  Homeland Security had been a growth area within EPA tasked with protecting drinking water supplies against terrorist attack and researching possible impacts on the natural environment from radiation, drinking water contamination and cleanup measures themselves.
• Climate change highlights include $17M for the EPA's greenhouse gas emissions inventory, $5M to examine offsets under a cap-and-trade program, and $2M to reduce EPA’s greenhouse gas emissions by 3 percent a year. EPA climate research under the interagency U.S. Global Change Research Program would total $20.9M, a $3M increase after several attempts by the previous administration to cut funding.
• EPA’s R&D mission draws most heavily upon life and environmental sciences, with significant contributions from engineering to develop commercializable technologies.
• Like most federal agencies, EPA predominantly funds its own intramural R&D (78% - see Figure 2).  The agency distributes about 13% of its R&D dollars to universities and the remainder (9%) to nonprofits, industrial firms, and state and local governments.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Back to Top

Department of Transportation on the upswing

 

With oversight of a massive infrastructure of highways, aviation, rail, transit, and marine transportation systems, DOT is in line to receive an overall budget of $73B in 2010, a healthy increase of 19.6%.  The percentage share for R&D is small (2%) and DOT’s $1.6B R&D budget represents an increase of only 3.9%. In absolute terms, however, this amount eclipses the R&D budgets of EPA, DOI, VA, and even Commerce and Homeland Security. (Note: AAAS considers only $939M of DOT’s $1.6B budget to be true R&D.)

 

• The DOT R&D spending has been up and down over the past two decades (Figure 1). In the last ten years, these fluctuations have resulted from the Sep 11, 2001 terrorist attacks and transfer of aviation security and Coast Guard R&D to DHS. If the 2010 request is enacted, it would represent the largest budget in history for programs that remain intact at DOT.
• Within the aviation R&D, program beneficiaries would include the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) and FAA’s main Research, Engineering, and Development (RE&D) account and Facilities and Equipment portfolio. NextGen encompasses new technologies and operating systems designed to improve capacity of the U.S. civil aviation system by moving from radar-based to satellite-based navigation.
• Within Highway R&D, augmented programs will include the surface transportation research portfolio (highway safety, pavement technologies, highway operations, and environmental impacts) and the Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) portfolio of innovative technologies to improve traffic flow.
• DOT’s R&D performer profile is unique. Based on 2007 numbers (Figure 2), 51% of DOT R&D was performed by industry, 31% in-house, 7% by universities, 7% by state and local governments and nonprofits, and 3% by federally funded research and development centers.
• DOT’s disciplinary emphasis is also unique, being heavily skewed (over 75%) toward engineering (Civil in particular).  However, at only 4% of overall federal engineering support, DOT still trails DOD, NASA, DOE, NIH, and NSF. Besides engineering, DOE is also an important sponsor of research in psychology and environmental sciences.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Back to Top