Statement by the President on Making Public a Report on the National Institutes of Health.
THIS NATION has no finer or firmer commitment than our determination to conquer disease and improve the health of all people in our land and around the world.
We are seeking now to assure the availability of the best possible medical care to all citizens at all ages of life. Yet we recognize that the long-term success of our struggle against disease and suffering must come from our broader understanding of the fundamental factors underlying human health and disease.
The leading edge of our national effort is the research conducted by the National Institutes of Health. NIH currently provides 40 percent of all funds spent for health research in the United States. More than a year ago, I requested a committee of distinguished citizens to conduct the most comprehensive study yet made of NIH operations to determine the effectiveness and quality of this key Federal program.
The report of this committee--presented to me today--is reassuring and challenging.
I find especially reassuring the conclusion of the committee that "few, if any, $1 billion segments of the Federal budget are buying more valuable services for the American people than that administered by the NIH." It is most exceptional that of 240 traditional research grants investigated only 7 were judged by the committee to have been unworthy of support. The Public Health Service, the NIH staff, and the Congress--which has taken such a keen interest in advancing the NIH programs--can be gratified by this finding.
The comprehensiveness of the committee's approach to its study challenges administration of research programs throughout the Federal Government. I hope that the diagnostic techniques employed by this distinguished committee of non-Government experts will be applied to other Federal scientific programs--especially in regard to the relations between our universities and the Government. Our universities and educational institutions are a precious resource and we must continually seek ways to assure their more effective participation in our scientific programs.
The United States has achieved front rank in biomedical research--but we can do still better. I am confident that the committee's recommendations will contribute greatly to our continuing advance and I am asking Secretary Celebrezze to advise me on how these suggestions may be incorporated into the activities of his Department.
I appreciate the generous and selfless effort given by all members of the committee and all the many other outstanding participants in this White House study.
Note: The report, dated February 1965, is entitled "Biomedical Science and Its Administration" (Government Printing Office, 213 pp.).
In a separate release of the same day the White House stated that the committee, headed by Dr. Dean E. Wooldridge, had completed a year-long study of the operations of the National Institutes of Health. In the course of the study the committee had evaluated projects supported by NIH and had examined the administrative mechanisms by which it administers its funds and controls the quality of the scientific work it supports. The service of more than one hundred distinguished scientists and administrators, the release pointed out, were utilized by the committee in conducting its study.
The committee's principal findings as included in the report, the release noted, were stated as follows:
"The first and probably the most important general conclusion of the study is that the activities of the National Institutes of Health are essentially sound and that its budget of approximately one billion dollars a year is, on the whole, being spent wisely and well in the public interest.
"The second general conclusion of the study is that, despite the significant past accomplishments and the high quality of the current effort, substantial problems will arise in the future unless changes are made in the organization and procedures of NIH.
"The most important organizational need of NIH is the strengthening of its capacity for long-range planning, for determining the optimum utilization of its funds, and for ensuring that its activities and policies have the continued understanding and approval of the scientific and lay public. To help accomplish this strengthening, the committee recommends the establishment of a new advisory group, referred to herein as the Policy and Planning Council, to operate at the level of the Director of the National Institutes of Health. Concurrent with the establishment of the Policy and Planning Council, the autonomy of the separate Institutes and Institute Councils should be diminished and the authority of the Director of the National Institutes of Health should be increased. Such change in the balance of authority should occur both with respect to the various elements of the NIH organization and with respect to the access of the Director to the higher councils of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
"With respect to procedures, the most important NIH need is for changes to enhance the responsibility and authority of the university executives for the work conducted in their institutions. Accompanying their assumption of more responsibility for the NIH-supported work, the well-managed institutions should be made eligible for more funding of institutional grants (such as program projects and general research support grants). Authority should also be assigned to institutional executives to make a variety of project-related decisions presently reserved for central NIH determination. If proper changes are made a decrease in the red tape harassments that currently annoy many scientific investigators, along with an increase in the quality of institutional accountability for government funds, should be simultaneously achievable."
The release also listed the 13 members of the NIH study committee, as follows: Gen. James A. Doolittle, Chairman of the Board, Space Technology Laboratories, Redondo Beach, Calif.; Dr. William V. Houston, Honorary Chancellor, William Marsh Rice University, Houston, Tex.; Dr. George James, Commissioner of Health, New York City; Dr. William D. McElroy, Chairman, Department of Biology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md.; Dr. Carl V. Moore, Chairman, Department of Medicine, Washington University Medical School, St. Louis, Mo.; Mr. Quigg Newton, President, Commonwealth Fund, New York City; Dr. Joseph B. Platt, President, Harvey Mudd College, Clarernont, Calif.; Mr. Gwilym A. Price, Chairman of the Board, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pa.; Dr. J. Wayne Reitz, President, University of Florida, Gainesville, Fla.; Dr. Julius A. Stratton, President, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass.; Mr. Thomas J. Watson, Jr., Chairman of the Board, International Business Machines Corp., New York City; Dr. Jerome B. Wiesner, Dean of Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass.
Lyndon B. Johnson, Statement by the President on Making Public a Report on the National Institutes of Health. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/node/242180