RPC members present: Richard Ford, Bruno Giordani, Lloyd Johnston, Roberto Kampfner, Jill Macoska, Leslie McClure, Ben van der Pluijm, Joseph Rahme, Ben van der Pluijm (chair), Xiao-Ying Yu

OVPR staff present: Tim Killeen, Judy Nowack, Marvin Parnes, Toby Smith, Rob Todd, Fawwaz Ulaby, Jackie Hoats-Shields

Guest: Rebecca Blank

Approval of the Retreat notes is deferred until the next meeting.

Fawwaz Ulaby gave a brief summary of experience in Washington last week giving testimony before Congress at a hearing on basic research. He was one of four speakers. One question asked was whether the level of support provided to NSF and NIH is the proper level to sustain research? Ulaby said the funding over the years to NSF has declined in real dollars and the average amount of grants to faculty has declined in real dollars. While many European nations and Japan have realized that funding for basic research must increase, the US has not followed suit at least in regard to NSF. NIH has faired better. NSF works on very basic research, whereas NIH builds upon basic research. The congressmen seemed to believe in the importance of basic research but the questions they are asking include where does the money come from and how does it link up to economic benefits. Ulaby said he had a chance to talk informally with Rita Caldwell, Director of NSF, about support for young faculty. Ulaby said in past years NSF had special funding only for faculty in their first three years, but that is not available now. NSF is trying to address that issue again, this time for post-docs. It is unclear how many post-docs at UM such a program would affect. There is also another program to fund graduate students to work with teachers in K-12 schools.

Updates from the Associate Vice Presidents for Research

Tim Killeen said he has been in OVPR as Associate Vice President for Research for over two years. His portfolio includes engineering, information science, natural science, and undergraduate education. Killeen is also a liaison to UMTRI. Among the items he is currently working on are the Materials Science and Geosciences initiatives, both jointly sponsored by OVPR, LSA, and Engineering. Killeen said UM has incipient research strengths to build upon in these areas and they link to national efforts. The aim is to unify faculty in different areas. In the Materials Science initiative up to two faculty teams will be funded to work on materials science research, and these collaborations could become centers on campus. The initiative in Geosciences strives to combine environmental sciences and social sciences. Killeen said the campus is well-equipped to compete vigorously in these areas.

Other areas in which Tim Killeen is involved include the Spatial Analysis and GIS committee which is putting together a proposal for an incubator unit to report to OVPR. With regard to information technology, Killeen mentioned internet 2, and said the UM is getting ready to take advantage of national opportunities in this field. Killeen is a member of the Provost’s Council on the Environment, and is working on the Environmental Research initiative. He said there is a lot of possibility at UM in this area and it is a matter of connecting existing elements on campus. The success of the biweekly Environmental Research Colloquium is one indicator of the depth of interest in this area. Killeen is also involved in the integration of research and education for which UM is known as an innovator. One goal is to build more of an understanding of the outcomes of undergraduate reform activities.

Robert Todd said he came to OVPR in April 1999. He has been focusing on health science initiatives, such as working with the OVPR research units in health sciences. He is involved in the national search for a new director of the Reproductive Sciences Program, for which a strong group of candidates has been identified. Todd is also involved in the general review of the Institute of Gerontology.

A major project on which Robert Todd is working is the Life Sciences Initiative on campus and the Life Sciences Corridor. He said President Bollinger has committed substantial financial investment to support this initiative on campus for a new facility, and a new director, among other aspects. A major emphasis now is upon selecting the new director. Todd’s main involvement has been with the Life Sciences Corridor, coordinating UM’s activities with regard to the corridor. The idea of the corridor arose out of the interest of three universities, Michigan State, Wayne State, and University of Michigan, to take advantage of tobacco settlement money coming to the state. The State of Michigan is willing to commit to this initiative a substantial portion of the settlement on an annual basis for up to 20 years. The state hopes that this will trickle down into new jobs in the health sciences and in biotechnology within the state. The state realizes it is necessary to support basic and applied life science research in order to get to that point. A list of research topics have been identified for the corridor, including complex genomics, bioinformatics, animal models, neurobiology, diabetes, and other chronic diseases. Todd said these dovetail with the topics of the Life Sciences Initiative on campus. Related developments include the Van Andel Institute for Research which is being established in Grand Rapids. Part of the Life Sciences funding will go to upgrading infrastructure at the three institutions and establishing new centers. Todd said there is the opportunity to develop core facilities that will be of use to all the research institutions in the state.

Toby Smith introduced himself to the group. He began his work in OVPR, based in the UM/DC Office, in July. Smith is from Michigan, is a UM graduate, and formerly worked with Bob Traxler. Prior to coming to back to Michigan, he worked seven years in the MIT Washington office and has ample experience working as a liaison between academic communities and Washington DC.

Smith gave a brief update on recent happenings in Washington and said the outlook is positive despite some concerns about budget caps. He said some Michigan members, such as Vern Ehlers, have been very active in support of basic research.

Toby Smith said the best people to explain about research enterprises are the faculty themselves. He said that in DC relationship building is the key and it is important to establish a presence by going out to talk to people. He noted that the average member of congress has never done research and likely does not understand the connection between research grants and education. Another complicating factor is that the congressional staffers with whom one often interacts are young and they turn over in their jobs every two or three years. Smith said UM has a wealth of knowledge that congressional representatives need in order to make decisions on important issues. Smith wants to create an environment where congress people will call the DC office to be put in touch with UM faculty expertise in key areas. We need to create greater awareness among congressional representatives that this range of expertise is here at UM and available to them.

Smith said he is still learning how and where UM is currently engaged in DC. He will be finding out who on campus is already on federal advisory committees. Smith is working to build links with existing coalitions that have been established to support research interests in Washington. Locally, he is involved with efforts to build UM alliances with business, such as the Ann Arbor Chamber of Businesses.

Toby Smith said students are also excellent spokespersons for research. Faculty could consider bringing students with them to their meetings in Washington. Students can clearly show the links between education and research and the importance of research to the future. Furthermore, unlike professors, undergraduate students do not necessarily have vested interests in getting funding for a certain lab. At MIT, students were encouraged to become active by contacting state representatives to discuss the importance of research. Another way for students to become involved is to take a summer internship in Washington. Smith said there are internships available that focus specifically on science and engineering.

Fawwaz Ulaby said AAAS has a fellowship program in policy and through this provides student staffers to congressional representatives. Congressional representatives depend on the advice of their staffers, who are educated at universities like Michigan. Ulaby noted that in our education of these future staffers, UM has an opportunity to instill in them the value of research. Toby Smith added that while there is high turnover in congressional staffer jobs, a great number of these individuals stay in DC in various positions which drive policy.

On the mechanics of operating in DC, Smith said he is available to help and faculty should call him when they are considering a trip to Washington. In addition there are some handy resources available on the web. The AAAS web page (http://www.aaas.org/) is useful for tracking funding levels. AAAS also has a guide book to working with congress. To find out what representatives are doing on certain issues, the Project Vote Smart web site (http://www.vote-smart.org/) is useful.

Rebecca Blank introduced herself and said she has a very strong interest in Washington DC, as she came to UM from serving two years in the Clinton administration. Prior to that she was at Northwestern University and Princeton, and still spent a lot of time in DC. Blank said in her view it is necessary to think about the way UM interacts with the entire policy world, including the state and local levels.

Ben van der Pluijm said there is a perception that MIT is better at placing its faculty in DC, and he asked what is their model for doing so. Toby Smith said MIT does a good job of marketing their strengths, and in the MIT culture there is a very strong push for faculty to be active in DC. In addition, MIT has a strong spirit of entrepreneurialism which gets faculty out beyond campus.

Richard Ford said the Midwest perception is that if you are geographically closer to Washington you are more likely to get invited to participate. He asked whether it is always necessary for us to invite ourselves to participate or must we wait to be invited. Rebecca Blank said there is a coastal bias, and people in DC don’t realize how close Michigan is. She said you do need to know people in some cases, and she acknowledged that it is hard to invite oneself but it is still necessary sometimes. She said getting to know people in Washington face to face is very valuable.

Tim Killeen pointed out that we can also bring leaders from Washington here to campus as we have done at our national research policy conferences which are considered a model by some in DC. Toby Smith said that often the best interactions with congressional representatives can take place here, back home in their Michigan offices. In their home states, they are usually not on such a hectic schedule as in Washington, and it is easier to get their attention.

Rebecca Blank said the issue of involvement and presence in DC is partly an advocacy issue, and universities are not good at advocacy. She said congress people do not get a lot of letters from faculty about research issues. In addition, some professional organizations refuse to lobby in DC. Still, key votes regularly come up which impact life on campus. Lloyd Johnston said some of it has to do with information dissemination. Faculty may not know that a certain congress person is working on a certain committee issue, or know when the votes are coming up. Toby Smith said he is working on refining a way to know who to inform of which issues. He noted that timing is critical in communications to congress. Rebecca Blank said letters from faculty can be more effective than those from a dean or vice president because of faculty’s detailed perspective on how certain actions will affect their work.

Richard Ford pointed out that there seem to be different levels of impact, with letter writing on the low end. He said there must be additional high-impact ways to influence policy. The perception is that we need to have faculty in the right academies to do so. Ford asked whether UM has enough faculty in the academies currently to have a great influence. As a creative alternative, he cited an example of the Smithsonian Institution which impressed members of congress with the importance of archaeology by getting their children interested in archaeology through a special program.

Lloyd Johnston said we must not neglect the importance of the media since it is an important broker in reaching congress and the public. He noted that congress people read the papers, not academic journals or reports. He emphasized that research is newsworthy and suggested getting UM research into the papers more frequently. Johnston cited the recent Harvard study about drinking on college campuses which received much press. While the UM study on the same topic actually covers a longer span of time, there was simply less publicity around it. Johnson commented that there should be UM guest editorials in the newspapers more frequently.

Toby Smith noted that the group may be interested in looking at the recent study, “Worlds Apart,” on communication between the scientific community and journalists. Rebecca Blank said writing newspaper editorials can be very effective, and this can be initiated individually or by UM’s news bureau. She also pointed out that when a vote is coming up on an issue the congressional staff is very eager for information. Blank suggested identifying an issue that congress is deliberating and coordinating key faculty to talk to their staff about it. One option, which Toby Smith said he could assist in arranging, would be to book a conference room and invite the congressional staff and the faculty to have a briefing on the topic in question.

Ben van der Pluijm proposed that OVPR take the lead in initiating some of these suggestions. Jill Macoska said keeping faculty apprised of the top issues coming up in DC is important. Toby Smith listed some of the issues that are on the forefront and on which congressional committees are working:

Information technology

Nano technology (PCAST)

Bioinformatics

Elementary/Secondary Education Act (important for support of science education)

Biocomplexity (NSF)

Sustainable development/environmental concerns

Lloyd Johnston said it would be valuable to stimulate assistance from News and Information Services (NIS) on this, for instance, NIS could do an article with faculty members on a topic at the time the topic is coming up to a vote. Jill Macoska suggested having the Associate Vice Presidents for Research identify faculty in the key areas which they themselves are working on, since these often correspond to areas of interest to congress. Once these faculty members are identified, NIS could be notified of who they are so they could do an article with the faculty member(s) on key topics.