Washington Highlights: October 22,
2004
HHS Funding Deadlock
Continues; Congress to Return Nov. 16
Contents
Prior Issues
 |
The dispute between the House and Senate leadership over the funding
total for the FY 2005 Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations bill continues.
The bill passed by the House Sept. 9 (H.R.
5006, H.
Rept. 108-636) provides $143.1 billion in discretionary funding
for the three departments and related agencies, an increase of $3.365
billion (2.4 percent) over FY 2004. The Senate Appropriations Committee-approved
bill (S.
2810, S.
Rept. 108-345) provides $142.3 billion in discretionary funding,
an increase of $2.563 billion (1.8 percent). However, the Senate
Committee also shifted the delivery of $3.2 billion in mandatory
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit checks into FY 2006 to
provide for additional spending on other programs. The House leadership
opposes this proposal, slowing progress toward a conference agreement.
Congressional staff indicate that no decision on the overall funding
total is expected before the election.
Meanwhile, the President Oct. 18 signed the District of Columbia
appropriations bill (P.L. 108-335). This means that Congress must
address 9 of the 13 regular appropriations bills when it returns
to Washington Nov. 16. The House has passed all but the VA-HUD-Independent
Agencies bill (H.R.
5041). However, the Senate has passed only 2 of the remaining
9 bills.
Information:
Dave Moore, Senior Director
AAMC Government Relations
dbmoore@aamc.org
(202) 828-0525
NIH Issues Revised Grant Review Criteria
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Oct. 12 announced revisions
in the stated criteria
it uses for evaluating research grant applications. The criteria
will become effective for most applications received after Jan.
10, 2005. The new criteria will be shared with reviewers who serve
on NIH scientific review groups at the February/March meetings.
The criteria were last modified in 1997. The stated goal of the
changes
is to update the criteria to include information relevant to clinical,
translational and interdisciplinary studies.
Information:
Tony Mazzaschi, Senior Director
AAMC Scientific Affairs
tmazzaschi@aamc.org
(202) 828-0059
VA Rescinds LOI Requirement for Research Projects
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Research and
Development (ORD) Oct. 5 announced
that letters of intent (LOI) will no longer be required for biomedical
and clinical research merit review submissions in the VA Biomedical
Laboratory Research and Development (BLR&D) and the Clinical
Science Research and Development (CSR&D) services. LOIs will
continue to be required under the Merit Review Entry Program (MREP)
and Career Development Programs. Researchers submitting investigator
initiated research proposals to the Health Services Research and
Development Service (HSR&D) will also no longer be required
to submit letters of intent; however, stations are requested to
submit a notification of intent to submit. Additional guidance on
this process will be forthcoming. Individuals submitting rehabilitation
merit review proposals to the Rehabilitation Research and Development
Service (RR&D) will continue to be required to submit letters
of intent to submit.
Information:
Jonathan Fishburn, Director, Research, Education and Veterans' Legislative Affairs
AAMC Government Relations
jfishburn@aamc.org
(202) 828-0525
NQF Cancer Care Steering Committee Agree on Framework
The steering committee for the National Quality Forum's Cancer
Care project met Oct. 19 to decide upon a framework to guide the
decisions of the project's technical advisory panels that will evaluate
candidate measures in the following areas: breast cancer, colon
cancer, and symptom management/end-of-life care. The purpose of
the project is to achieve consensus on a set of voluntary standards
that can be used to assess the quality of cancer care in the United
States.
The meeting began with a review of a modified version of the Forum's
Hospital Measures Framework. Included in this review were five domains,
recommended by Forum staff, for evaluating the comprehensiveness
of cancer measures, including stage-specific and cross cutting measures,
demographic and vulnerable populations. During the review, there
was significant discussion among the steering committee about prevention
and screening. In addition, the importance of efficiency, particularly
from the purchaser's perspective, was mentioned. The steering committee
approved the domains with some minor changes.
Criteria for focusing the domains was the next issue the steering
committee considered. Several steering committee members raised
the issue of using measures for accountability versus quality improvement.
This topic generated significant discussion among the steering committee,
which concluded that the technical advisory panels should consider
measures for both accountability and quality improvement. The steering
committee subsequently approved the criteria proposed for each domain.
Prior to this meeting, a data and methods panel convened [see Washington
Highlights, Aug. 27] to
provide recommendations to the steering committee on the type of
guidance to provide the three technical advisory panels. Their report
was reviewed by the steering committee, and approved with minor
changes. The steering committee has not scheduled any follow up
meetings; the next step is for the technical advisory panels to
review the candidate measures in the following areas: breast cancer,
colon cancer, and symptom management/end-of-life care.
Information:
Jennifer Faerberg, Director,GME Track/Health Care Quality Liaison
AAMC DHCA
jfaerberg@aamc.org
(202) 862-6221
|
