University of Maryland School of Medicine

Research Strategic Plan, FY2008-2013

December 18, 2007

INTRODUCTION

The University of Maryland School of Medicine senior research community met in 2007 to discuss the development of a strategic plan for research while also celebrating over 200 years of unprecedented growth and accomplishments. As a result, the following roadmap was developed to lay the foundation for future growth over the next five years.

It is important to celebrate the School of Medicine moving into the 25th place ranking as reported in NIH awards to medical schools by rank, FY2005. This is a significant achievement and places us in a highly respected position in the biomedical research community. In order to achieve Top 15 status, we will have to continue to be successful in NIH and other extramural grant funding.

We are entering a new era of research opportunities as well as increasing challenges. We have had many significant research accomplishments and our return on public investments is extraordinary. We are not alone in our pursuit of research funding. This is highlighted by NIH data showing R01 applications continuing to rise, while success rates continue to decline. This backdrop is also occurring as federal biomedical research funding is leveling off. Awards are fewer and award funding is often cut to ensure new awards can be made. Competition for the recruitment and retention of funded investigators will markedly increase as NIH funding remains stagnant.

Funding for biomedical research remains a national priority, including federal, state, and private funding for grants and contracts, but the competition is fierce. To achieve Top 15 status will require a sustained commitment of time and energy to the priorities captured in the following recommendations.

These priorities focus on our core resources: 1) people, 2) leadership, 3) facilities and infrastructure, 4) research investment, and 5) innovations and outstanding science. To meld these resources requires a roadmap, and a sound financial approach to new opportunities.

Our carefully planned approach starts with the vision that UMSOM will achieve Top 15 ranking within 5 years. We will take specific steps to increase the number of new and established NIH investigators. This approach and associated monitoring will keep us focused on the goal we have set for ourselves.

The following areas of agreement highlight our strategy.

Areas of Agreement

Defining the SOM research identity

Developing SOM faculty to maximize success and productivity by using a balanced approach that

Dedicating improved resources to support research

Defining milestones for the achievement of priorities to reach and sustain top tier status including increases in long-term growth of fungible research of at least 5% annually

With this general agreement, the following priorities and commitments were formulated as a roadmap for the next 5 years for the SOM.

UMSOM Priorities and Commitments

I. Defining the Research Identity

The research enterprise as a whole is making rapid advances by using team approaches and collaborative partnerships, which cut across organizational boundaries. This fosters a greater exchange of ideas and efficient use of scarce resources. SOM should emphasize and expand its sense of community in the following ways:

  1. Priority #1: Foster a more collaborative research community by:

    2.

    1. Increasing support for multi-investigator research to develop new approaches to research problems

      2.

      • Provide incentives to successful principal investigators to become collaborative leaders e.g.. Salary stipends, protection of PI's research program areas.

      • Provide support for groups with collaborative potential, e.g. mini-retreats, pilot data, etc.

      • Re-visit APT guidelines to recognize interdisciplinary research contributions

      • Ensure that departments are evaluated by measures that fully account for collaboration (e.g. co-investigators, PPG core directors and co-directors).

      • Support existing and encourage new Centers/Institutes

      • Encourage multi-investigator, PPG, Center grant submissions by providing resources pre-award and additional resources (e.g. space, additional funds) post-award.

      • Reward investigators and their departments for co-investigation, e.g. sharing of DRIF funds; recognition for promotion/tenure decisions.

    2. Increasing Partnering opportunities:
      3.

      In the next two years:

      • Establish a Dean's Research Forum

      • Create a central listing of Journal Clubs

      • Establish monthly Research Colloquia of Basic/Clinical Science leaders & Dean to discuss only research

    3. Targets: Reinforcing the Priority of Collaboration

      4.

      In the next year:

      • Departments, RAAC & SOM will identify areas for investment in collaborative research

      • Departments, RAAC & SOM will develop measures of success for departmental collaboration

  2. Priority #2: Support existing and emerging centers of clinical-translational research excellence, and ensure continued growth (CTSA)
    3.

    There is an increasing public awareness of the biomedical research enterprise and the need to make greater advances in understanding human health. There is also a strong desire to rapidly convert that understanding through translational research to prevent, reduce, or ameliorate adverse impacts on human health. Future basic-to-clinical advances are key to growing the research enterprise while reducing pain, suffering and spiraling health care costs. To succeed, SOM needs to build and maintain translational research excellence.

    1. Targets: Transform our clinical research enterprise by successfully competing for the CTSA

      2.

      • Develop a vision for the SOM Clinical Translational Science Institute (CTSI)

      • Create the leadership structure necessary to guide the SOM through this transformation

      • Submit our CTSA grant proposal by October 2007

      • Make necessary institutional changes to fulfill the CTSI vision including creating the structure for centers of excellence


    2. Targets: Define Established and Emerging Clinical Research Centers of Excellence (CE)

      3.

      • The SOM, through the RAAC, will develop criteria for defining established centers as well as emerging areas of clinical-translational research excellence.

      • The SOM, through the RAAC and FAAC, will use these criteria to help enhance existing centers and to promote emerging areas in becoming established centers of research excellence.

      • The SOM, in conjunction with the departments, will develop a needs assessment of existing and emerging centers and identify plans/strategies for addressing their needs (funding, space, institutional infrastructure, etc.).

      • The SOM, in conjunction with the departments, will implement identified plans to address the needs of all of the centers of excellence.

      • Progress on these implementation plans will be assessed annually by following (where available) rolling 3-5 year averages of productivity.


    3. Targets: Grow Established Clinical Research Centers of Excellence

      4.

      • The research portfolios for SOM-supported, established research centers of excellence will increase at a minimum rate of 5% annually

      • Emerging Clinical Research Centers of Excellence will establish a base level research portfolio as quickly as possible

      Over the next 5 years, at least 50% of clinical departments will have an area of clinical excellence that meets the criteria for an established center of clinical-translational research excellence. The SOM will work with each Department to set goals and agree to appropriate timeframes.

    4. Targets: Focus on Key Areas of Convergence and Productivity

      • Establish measures of research productivity for clinical faculty in 2007-2011 for each Department. SOM will set department goals and let chairs manage according to the unique conditions faced by each department to achieve a long-term growth rate of at least 5% annually. All appropriate faculty with a clinical role will develop a research plan with their department chair. Each clinical department chair will identify: (1) clinical faculty with potential for independent, funded research and develop appropriate mentoring programs to facilitate developing funded research potential; and (2) clinical faculty who could strengthen existing basic, translational, or clinical research programs by encouraging interactions with funded investigators. This plan will be used to guide the faculty member's submission of research grants and will represent the measure by which the member will be evaluated. Each plan should aim for at least a 5% growth rate annually in investigator initiated research funded by federal sources, industry and philanthropic sources. The plan should also address protected time for research, clinical, and educational responsibilities as well as faculty development programs for clinician researchers.

      • Define measures of success for translational research productivity including increased:
        • applications for Intellectual Property (IP) rights, including licenses and patents
        • efforts in philanthropy
        • communication and collaboration with large pharmaceutical companies to capitalize on areas of mutual interest
        • number of principal investigators
        • number of collaborative activities in the Clinical and Translational Science Award

II. Developing SOM Faculty and Resources to Maximize Success and Productivity

  1. Priority #1: Prioritize recruitment of established (funded) PIs and development of the pipeline of exceptional new investigators.

    2.

    In faculty recruitment, UMMS/SOM will strive for an explicit balance between investing resources in new investigators with high potential for success and those who are already well funded. While this balance may vary across content areas and time, the rationale for the approach selected should be explicit and justified based upon a priori evaluation of goals and opportunities. We need to concentrate on UMSOM's research uniqueness and diversity.

    1. Targets: Prioritize and select "the best" pipeline candidates to generate R01s

      • Identify and support young investigators that will develop into tomorrow's "stars".

      • Improve the departmental search committee process to identify and review the best candidates.

      • Identify and support PI's with leadership/collaborative credentials.

      • Identify and support PI's that are the "missing piece" for Center grants, PPGs & U's.

      • Increase the number of endowed chairs and professorships by 5% annually over the next five years.

    2. Targets: Increase the number of R01 Investigators
      3.
      • The increase in research funding should be accompanied by an increase in the component of the research portfolio comprising R grants, PPGs, and Center grants.
      • Increase PPGs to 2-4% of the R01 base
      • Stay ahead of the curve in investing in new core technologies

    3. Targets: Focus on other Human Capital needs
      4.

      • Enrich our educational opportunities for graduate students, post docs and junior faculty through T- and K-type grants, as well as alternative R grants (R21, K99/R00)

      • Support medical student research training.

      • Recruit K-awardees.

  2. Priority #2: Nurture existing research faculty.

    3.

    Top tier institutions recognize early in their evolution that they survive and grow by attracting, developing, and retaining the best human capital. SOM recognizes that current strategies can no longer take them where they want to go without change. For change to occur the following actions are needed:

    1. Targets: Focus on Improving Return on Investment
      2.

      Retention:

      Be proactive, nimble and aggressive in meeting counter-offers for existing productive investigators, i.e. salary, seed space, teaching and clinical load, research infrastructure and collaborative environment. Proactively identify faculty-at-risk of loss and take steps to prevent.

      • Review funding and support for all current SOM faculty who are PIs on R01 grants in order to develop guidelines for continuing institutional support and identify areas of risk with regard to retention.

      • Apply sound financial guidelines as well as strategic planning to decisions regarding retention and bridge support, i.e. for historically funded investigators who lose funding and who are reapplying. These guidelines should be revisited and revised, as needed, annually.

      • As a result of above, the rate of departure of established (NIH funded) investigators will be reduced by 10% annually with FY2007 as the base year.

      Mentoring:

      Recognize, value, and reward successful mentoring, including adding mentoring as an explicit measure for promotion. Explore the potential of creating rewards/incentives for successful mentors including research support and salary bonuses. Increase interdepartmental mentors with like expertise and encourage multiple mentors (if required) that would address both research development and career development. Evaluate success over an appropriate time frame (~ 3 years).

      Leveraging Existing Expertise

      • Establish a web-based "Expertise Locator", where faculty "self-identify" technical expertise.

      Unfunded Research:

      Manage SOM resources efficiently by reducing unfunded research including:

      • Develop an ongoing census of: (i) chronically unfunded research programs, (ii) research programs where funding is "in-between" grants, and (iii) new, as yet unfunded efforts.

      • Monitor SOM funds allocated to support faculty in the above categories.

      • Explore K24 "Re-training/re-tooling" grants for unfunded faculty.

      • Pursue novel/creative early retirement incentives for chronically unfunded faculty.

Promotion and Tenure

The SOM will review current APT guidelines to ensure that these guidelines appropriately recognize research productivity and promote retention of highly productive faculty.

III. Increase Resources Supporting Research

  1. Priority #1: Increase state, federal, philanthropic, SOM & UMMS investment in research.

    2.

    The growth in investment of resources must be matched to the targeted long-term growth rate in the SOM research enterprise. The SOM, with its partners, UMMS and UMB, must aggressively and relentlessly pursue existing, new and novel sources of funding. The strategy and targets below provide a roadmap for next steps:

    1. Targets: Government Support

      • State: through increased annual state appropriation and state grants. Analysis of the long-term trend in State funding to the SOM and the total Return on Investment and the comparison of SOM state support and Return on Investment with other high ranking public universities will support the argument for increased State support.

      • UMB: through cost sharing of the SOM research infrastructure and interscholastic cores, research centers, and institutes and an increase in distribution of DRIF funds to the SOM.

      • Federal: Increase lobbying efforts, through "set-asides" and collaborative partnerships.

    2. Targets: Philanthropy: It is imperative that the SOM and UMMS cooperate in efforts to develop philanthropic giving with goals of expanding the SOM research enterprise and UMMS clinical programs.

      • Highest priority is for endowed professorships/chairs
        Target: to add 5 endowed professorships/chairs per year.
        Target: More endowed chairs/professorships in basic science departments

      • Explore ways for patient-rich departments (and the relevant UMMS patient units) to share philanthropic opportunities with patient-poor and basic science departments.
        Target: 20%/yr unrestricted development funds to departments/programs

      • Encourage donor giving to interdisciplinary programs rather than departments/individuals.
        Target: Increase programmatic giving to 10% of total philanthropy

    3. Targets: SOM Research Scholars Program:

      • Expand and re-visit criteria for cost sharing (loans, dept payback via IDC). Bonus points for collaborative potential
        Target: Recruit 5-10 SOM Scholars/year

      • UMMS: Increase UMMS buy-in to translational research/CTSA
        Target: To be set by SOM & CTSA steering committee

  2. Priority #2: Identify & strengthen core facilities / infrastructure.

    Infrastructure as defined by bricks and mortar is essential to expanding capacity for new research, and to accommodate needed technology and collaboration.

    Infrastructure Support is also critical to deal with the growing bureaucracy needed for research e.g. HR, finance, procurement, budget, etc. UMSOM needs to continue to expand infrastructure to be competitive.

    1. Targets: Focus on Space Management

      • The SOM, through the RAAC, will continue to review existing research space allocations annually and provide recommendations to the Dean for periodic reallocation of space based upon three-year rolling averages in direct and indirect costs.

      • Identify sufficient space to meet targeted growth in research space.

      • Explore the possibility of consolidating key core technologies in a central location.

    2. Targets: Focus on Construction

      3.

      • Relentlessly pursue earlier construction of HSFIII. Target: Project Start – 2008

      • There is an immediate need for 50,000 square feet of research space to support the current research enterprise and near-term growth (we cannot wait for HSFIII) and the need for renovation of selected current research space.

      • Expand renovation of current research space to meet future needs

    3. Targets: Focus on Matrix Organization Partnerships and Needs

      4.

      • Work closely with ORD to insure the quality of: contracts and grants processing and management; advice and consultation; and, other support services. Encourage outstanding customer service through improved communication, common goal setting, and achievement of quality standards.

      • Expand efforts to capitalize on intellectual property by increasing IP income by 10%/yr compounded.

    4. Targets: Focus on mechanisms of accountability:

      5.

      • Policy: Define standards for salary support on sponsored projects and research incentives.

      • Responsibility: Examine the current responsibilities of the FAAC and RAAC.

      • Process: Review APT procedures and interaction with the departments to provide assurance that there is the appropriate recognition and balance across the research, clinical and educational missions of the SOM.

Conclusion

We need to maintain our current momentum, and actively engage in creative leadership as well as innovation to exploit the opportunities we have laid out in this roadmap. SOM will succeed in reaching the Top 15 ranking, based on our commitment to excellence in research and clinical missions, as well as the strength of our faculty, our infrastructure, and our creativity.

The challenge for everyone over the coming years is to:

 

This site will work and look much better in a modern web browser, such as Internet Explorer 6, Firefox, or Safari 1.2 (Mac)
Copyright © University of Maryland School of Medicine