Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Developing a *sexy* infrastructure grant
Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
Developing a “sexy” infrastructure grant Joyce Cohen, VMD, DACLAM Yerkes National Primate Research Center Yerkes National Primate Research Center Main Station and Field Station Species Rhesus macaques Cynomolgus macaques Pigtail macaques Squirrel monkeys Sooty Mangabeys Chimpanzees Mice Rats Voles AIDS Immune System Function Vaccines Transplantation Medicine Malaria Tuberculosis Parkinson’s Disease Huntington’s Disease Alzheimer’s Disease Neurological Basis of Behavior Obesity Autism Cognitive Development Social & Emotional Development Genetics Reproduction Cocaine / Drug Addiction Cardiovascular Disease Cognitive & Social Changes in Aging Other Infectious Diseases Yerkes History of Infrastructure Grants Project Grant Year Amount Funded Automated Feeders & Welfare G20 2014 500,000 Yes Innovative Research Housing C06 2013 1,000,000 Yes Automated Feeders G20 2013 500,000 No Housing Renovations RD G20 2012 500,000 No HIV Housing Expansion C06 2011 1,500,000 No DFF C06 (ARRA) 2011 14,868,223 Yes Pathology Lab G20 2009 500,000 Yes Fundability Factors Basic design of project Documented need Innovative feature, function or design Forward thinking Well written Supporting Information Provide data to support the information Detail Institutional grant information Provide numbers to support claims Number of grants ($) Animal census Pending assignment requests Build a story around the data Include benefits for external institutions Additional institutional support always a bonus Detail the amount of institutional support Reviewer Instructions Review the FOA details Understand how the reviewers are instructed to score the grant Write the grant to address the review categories Confront the questions that reviewers may have and provide the answers C06: Innovative AIDS Research Housing for Nonhuman Primates Overall Impact/Priority Score of 27 Design: Seven monkey suites and14 adjacent runs Housing up to 16 animals each for a total of 112 animals Two treatment/procedure rooms for AIDS vaccine studies Supporting data Growing HIV/AIDS Research Program (over 32 million in 2012) Animal numbers for pending requests and future grant needs C06: Innovative AIDS Research Housing C06: Innovative AIDS Research Housing C06: Innovative AIDS Research Housing C06- Critiques Strengths This application presented clear justification for the requested funds and provided very clear illustrations and description of the facility design and use. The AIDS research conducted at the Yerkes is well described and is noteworthy; the evidence is in the amount of support received in the past year (over $32 million in 2012). The proposed design is very innovative. The combination of traditional housing and runs coordinated with the research protocol will enhance the welfare of the animals. Repurposing of existing Chimpanzee holding spaces that are no longer needed is a great innovative use of resources and offers a unique opportunity to improve enrichment and well-being of the animals proposed to be housed in these spaces. Sustainable designs are well described. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification is alluded to. C06- Critiques Weaknesses While some of the collaborators are called out by name, the collaboration is mostly addressed in general terms. The layout of the treatment/procedure room and laundry are of concern. Accesses to the treatment/procedure rooms are awkward. Entry into each space requires passage through another space, thus only one of the treatment rooms can be used at a time. A description of vector/vermin control and animal intrusion issues should have been discussed with respect to the run areas. Construction… Challenges in responding to NIH questions NIH Review team changed New issues to address Generator Redundancy in HVAC Increased expenses $$$$$$$$$$$ Delayed start time G20 Implementing automated feeders to improve welfare and care of nonhuman primates G20: Automated Feeders This innovative technology could revolutionize current husbandry practices and become the “standard of care” for maintaining large social colonies of nonhuman primates Enhance Veterinary Care Predict Social Instability Animal Census Manage Obesity Reduce Food Waster Enhance Research Opportunities Impact score : 16 Animal Welfare Reports Utilization of feeding reports in health surveillance G20: Critiques Strengths A letter from the Director of the Tulane NPRC endorses the project by saying that it may lead to a paradigm shift in the field of NHP care and welfare. The PI has included a table describing situations whereby in using the automated feeders injured animals were detected earlier, as was a postpartum female with a retained placenta. Treatments could be instituted earlier leading to a better prognosis for recovery. The program is Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care (AAALAC) accredited; institutional support is evidenced by the growth of sponsored research funding and the construction of three new buildings in recent years. G20: Critiques Weaknesses There is currently one sole vendor (Research Diets, Inc.), and the initial investment to implement the system at other institutions may be substantial. The need for the project is based mostly on value added and not need. 2013: A Paradigm Shift in Management of Primate Breeding Colonies The costs of the system are rather high, over $100,000 per group of animals. This could be a high hurdle for many institutions as the overt savings do not reach a level that would amortize the first cost. It is possible, however, with further commercial development, the system cost will come down significantly. Benefit of this technology seems somewhat speculative at this time. Benefit of improved pest control is not compelling There is no detail on the microchip that must be implanted to enable the system. Since chip implantation is integral to the design, details on implantation should have been provided. Acknowledgements C06 Francois Villenger Stuart Zola Vicki West G20 Mark Wilson Zach Johnson Kelly Ethun Questions
