THE UGA BIOMEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES INSTITUTE
1. Background
The Executive Planning Committee of the UGA Biomedical Sciences and Human Health Initiative was formed to advise the Provost about developing a program to link the University’s many activities and resources in the biomedical and health sciences fields. The Committee met from January through June of 2000 and has produced the present document as an internal recommendation to the Provost. The Report has two parts. First, the main body (Sections 2-12) describes a proposed new UGA Biomedical and Health Sciences Institute. Second, the Appendices (A-E) record the committee’s deliberations on a range of related topics and issues that formed the conceptual foundation for the proposal.
At its initial meetings, the Committee developed a mission statement and three main goals for the overall Initiative and discussed objectives. The mission, goals and objectives formulated at the beginning of the process (see Appendix A) were intended to serve as a guide for those working collectively to strengthen biomedical and health science programs at UGA, and they directly inform the current proposal to establish an interdisciplinary institute.
Next the committee analyzed the findings of ten faculty discussion groups that met during the previous December to identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and needs in the biomedical and health science fields at UGA. The discussion group reports provided the basis for proposing three content area divisions within the proposed institute (see section 9). The wide range of current activities at UGA suggested by the discussion group reports was explored in more detail by the development of an inventory of faculty involved in the biomedical and health fields and their research interests (Appendix E). These materials demonstrate in detail a fact that is not widely known outside the University: UGA has a significant number of faculty who are conducting medically related research, more than three hundred, and UGA receives more than $20 million in extramural funding annually for medically related research.
The faculty involved in this research come from programs within the life sciences, the behavioral sciences, the health profession colleges of Pharmacy and Veterinary Medicine, the health communications programs within the College of Journalism and Mass Communication and the College of Arts and Sciences, programs in Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Social Work, Family and Consumer Sciences, Education, as well as within many UGA research centers such as the Complex Carbohydrate Research Center, the Center for Tropical and Global Emerging Diseases, the Institute for Behavioral Research and the Gerontology Center. The University also possesses nationally prominent programs in basic research that make fundamental contributions in the biomedical fields because they offer enabling technologies. The Georgia X-Ray Crystallography Center and the Center for Metalloenzymes are two examples. Health policy programs also link the Colleges of Business Administration and the School of Law with the Biomedical Sciences and Health Initiative. It is clear that the Biomedical and Health Sciences Initiative has campus-wide implications and must serve a broadly interdisciplinary function.
The Committee discussed various possible administrative structures that could link and strengthen the biomedical and health science efforts underway at UGA. One notion that became dominant was that UGA should be able to develop a unique solution to its particular situation, learning from experience elsewhere, but developing new programs positioned strategically to strengthen UGA capabilities and address national and international health priorities. Even without a medical school, an institution-wide program at UGA focused on biomedical and health sciences could allow isolated and generally unknown programs of quality to coalesce into an entity that would attract greater funding, top faculty, graduate and undergraduate students of quality, and other resources and opportunities.
Another important issue discussed throughout the deliberations was the potential for UGA collaboration with the Medical College of Georgia. The Committee decided that it was imperative to build a structured program for UGA in the biomedical and health sciences even if no linkages were possible with outside institutions. Moreover, there are such strong reasons to proceed in this direction at UGA, that it seemed unacceptable to postpone action until after the issues of fiscal risk, administrative complexity, and political resistance could be overcome in connection with a UGA/MCG partnership. The Committee decided to develop a plan for UGA to proceed on its own, culminating in the current proposal. At the same time, there was a recognition that a partnership that combined UGA’s strengths in the basic sciences with MCG’s clinical and research capabilities could be advantageous for the state of Georgia and both institutions, particularly in attracting federal research funding. Additionally, the Regents indicated they would recommend funding for a proposal initiated by the UGA Provost in cooperation with MCG to incentivize stronger research ties between the two institutions. The Committee thus took a two-stage approach: to develop a structure to strengthen UGA programs but then to consider how that structure could help improve existing collaborations with MCG.
An analysis of the factors involved in developing stronger collaboration between UGA and MCG is found in Appendix B, along with a synopsis of three key documents reviewed by the committee and an extensive list of the potential benefits of collaboration for both institutions. The proposal to the Regents for enhancing collaboration between UGA and MCG was submitted over a year ago and still offers the most pragmatic vision for significantly improving cooperation. An update of this proposal with revisions suggested by MCG has been submitted this year and is found in Appendix C, which also includes the formal Request for Proposals drafted by the Committee, to be employed in the selection of the collaborative UGA/MCG research activities envisioned in the Provost’s proposal, if and when that funding is made available.
During the course of its deliberations, the Committee was approached with an opportunity to establish an annual award for graduate students in the biomedical sciences. After initial contacts were made by the Provost, delegates from the ARCS Foundation visited UGA to meet with the Committee and explain their scholarship program supporting graduate students in the sciences. The Committee subsequently developed the required materials for submission and the University was very recently informed that approval for funding from the Foundation is “highly likely” and that candidates should be identified for the 2000-2001 academic year. Appendix D contains additional information about ARCS and the UGA awards.
It is hoped that the following sections discussing the structure, purpose, and potential programs of a new interdisciplinary institute at UGA will be understood as the collective effort of this Committee to outline a vision for an academic entity with appropriate functions to create stronger linkages and improved capabilities for the already impressive array of biomedical and health science programs and activities at UGA. While the institute proposed is necessarily extensive in scope, it is intended to augment rather than displace existing programs and is not expected to affect the reporting structure of existing centers, institutes and programs or their faculty. The vision may not be perfect and there are many details to be considered carefully, but the Committee hopes the following pages will provide the basis for very favorable developments at UGA and a clear rationale for its recommendation to form a Biomedical and Health Sciences Institute (see page 17).
2. Description of the Institute
The UGA Biomedical and Health Sciences Institute (BHSI) will provide leadership, an institutional structure, funding, academic programs, and other resources for students and faculty from diverse departments and programs at UGA who share a commitment to biomedical and human health research and education. The Institute will be committed to developing increased visibility for UGA accomplishments in these fields, better access to interdisciplinary research opportunities, improved extramural funding, additional facility and equipment resources, educational opportunities to attract quality students to the Institute, and improved support and administrative mechanisms for collaborative relationships inside and outside the University. The Institute will be governed by its interdisciplinary faculty and led by a Director who will report to the UGA Vice President for Research. Based on the range of current activity, existing strengths, and opportunities for expansion, the current plan recommends that the Institute be structured with three program areas, each led by a Divisional Chair:
the Division of Molecular Medicine;
the Division of Infectious Disease and Immunity; and
the Division of Public Health.
The three Divisions will each develop and offer a graduate curriculum leading to a doctoral degree in their respective areas of focus. In addition, faculty from all three divisions will collectively develop and offer the Institute’s undergraduate program leading to an advanced BS/MS in Biomedical and Health Sciences. Other proposed components of the program include, but are not restricted to: a grants program for faculty research, graduate fellowships and research and dissertation awards for graduate students, an intra-institute research seminar program, a summer undergraduate research program, a BHSI sponsored spring symposium and related publications series, a visiting scholars program, foreign travel grants, community outreach/information programs, a legislators’ scientific experience day, and BHSI graduate advising.
3. General Benefits
First: the Institute will strengthen existing research and education programs at UGA. Many scientists in programs throughout UGA have independently pursued promising research paths in the biomedical and health fields, and the Institute is committed to supporting their efforts by increasing external recognition for their activities and advocating for improved funding from all sources. Established educational programs will benefit from an improved ability to recruit top students and faculty.
Second: the Institute will foster the development of new interdisciplinary educational programs and cross-disciplinary research opportunities. Strong training, hiring, and funding incentives exist for increased interdisciplinary collaboration in the biomedical and health sciences, and the Institute will provide a context and structure for UGA academic units to interact in their mutual interest.
Third: the Institute will enhance productive collaborations with outside medical institutions. Building a strong biomedical research program at UGA will provide the basis for increased collaborations with the Medical College of Georgia, other institutions with medically oriented research interests, and with industry.
Fourth: establishing the Institute will bring regional and national visibility for UGA’s biomedical and health research capabilities. The public’s understanding of the importance of UGA’s research to the health and well-being of the people of Georgia and the world is increasingly important for the University’s efforts to recruit top people, to secure major funding, and to gain political support at the state and national levels for initiatives that have the potential to foster research and long term economic development capabilities. The Institute will provide a natural focal point for media attention and a source for public information about biomedical and health science research achievements at UGA.
4. Administration and Faculty
The Director will have full budget and policy authority for the Institute. In addition to reporting to the Vice President for Research, the Director will interact with an Advisory Board of prominent leaders and advocates for the program. The Institute’s three Divisional Chairs will advise the Director in matters involving personnel and resource allocation in their respective divisions. It is the responsibility of each Divisional Chair to ensure proper staffing of BHSI courses and that Institute faculty meet their appropriate teaching responsibilities. The Chairs will also cooperate in graduate student recruitment and the allocation of the Institute’s available student financial support. To avoid any potential conflict of interest, no administrator within the Institute may concurrently serve a role as Director, Chair, or Head of any other Institute, Center, Program, Division, or Department at UGA.
The Institute’s founding faculty will be UGA researchers in existing programs who have a commitment to biomedical and health issues and distinction in the research community. They will need to be team players in developing highly innovative, future-oriented programs, with a strong interest in graduate education; familiarity with the operation of active laboratories and/or population based research activities that collectively cover a range of contemporary medical science and health issues; a strong publication record with an emphasis on recent publications; and a history of attracting extramural funding.
Challenges
Program funding for the Institute will come from institutional, state, external, and private sources. The need to assemble various and considerable resources for a major initiative at UGA in the biomedical and health sciences was discussed throughout the Planning Committee’s meetings, and with the Provost. Efforts to identify funding for the Institute director, staff, and eventually, a facility for the Institute, would have to be led by the administration centrally, in the Office of Research and by the Provost. The Committee is aware of the difficulties UGA faces in the development of new facilities, but it is not possible to imagine the Biomedical Institute reaching its full potential without the development of new research space. The Provost has noted that universities across the country are building massive new facilities in preparation for what promises to be a decade devoted to research in biomedical and human health fields, and the Committee unanimously supports her efforts to bring this issue into focus at UGA.
In addition to its administrative budget, the Institute would need additional support in the form of joint faculty appointments. There is an unprecedented opportunity at UGA to fill as many as eight endowed chairs with prominent new faculty, some or all assigned with joint status in the Biomedical Institute. It is also possible that new hires of junior faculty in the sciences might be considered for inclusion as joint appointments to the divisions within the new Institute, especially when that would be attractive to candidates and improve the chances of making priority hires.
The Committee identified joint appointments, credit in home departments for faculty involvement within the Institute, recognition for research successes, the distribution of indirect cost returns, and related issues as potential areas of concern for existing units. A general view of the committee was that such conflicts already exist, need to be addressed campus wide for a number of reasons, and would benefit from attention in the more comprehensive and more resource-favorable context of interdisciplinary biomedical and health science research and teaching. It needs to be emphasized that the purpose of the Institute is to link, strengthen and augment existing programs, not to compete with them. To the extent possible, solutions should seek to benefit all parties involved. The UGA interdisciplinary program in Toxicology is a possible model for developing such policies within the Divisions of the Institute. In any case, if the effort to establish this Institute proceeds, two immediate needs will be to develop a careful analysis of the conflicts that could arise between the Institute and other entities at UGA and to devise workable strategies to address these issues equitably and in advance.
Recognizing the need to increase extramural funding, the Committee considered ways to improve the relevant support infrastructure. Discussions with the Director of the UGA Office of Sponsored Research focused on the resources required to create special capabilities to identify, support, and streamline federal funding proposals for PIs working in the biomedical and health fields. Suggestions included developing a comprehensive system for electronic submission in keeping with federal movement in this direction, hiring a grants processing officer with experience in biomedical and health science, and developing a faculty strategy group to work with the sponsored research office in identifying areas of federal emphasis to be targeted by UGA initiatives in the biomedical and health sciences.
The Acting Director of the UGA Technology Commercialization Office (TCO) discussed strategies to improve the environment for biomedical and health science research. A strong technology transfer and commercialization specialty in this area would help attract both researchers and private companies looking to fund such research. One strategy would be to hire a new technology analyst who would have expertise in assessing, valuing and commercializing medical technologies. Such a person should be viewed as a colleague by research faculty, providing additional perspective as they develop their research directions. The acting TCO director and the Sponsored Research Director also indicated their commitment to integrating processes involving the development and subsequent management of industry sponsored research agreements.
The committee also considered ways of developing special resources to create visibility for the biomedical and health sciences programs at UGA to improve the university’s statewide and worldwide profile. In addition to publications, public meetings, and curricula developed within the Institute, suggestions included a health oriented public information focus within OVPR, perhaps directly linked to the activities of University Communications, or with a writer located directly within the Biomedical and Health Sciences Institute to promote its programs and research.
6. What will the Institute mean for Faculty?
A key benefit will be an increase in support for collaboration among UGA faculty in the biomedical and health fields. The Institute’s interdisciplinary graduate curriculum and the cooperative development of other new programs of the Institute will increase the already expanding biomedical research interactions among faculty from diverse programs. The Institute will develop expertise at fostering interdisciplinary collaborations. For example, federal Center of Excellence grant applications will have a logical administrative advocate in the Institute for interdisciplinary proposals and accumulated experience with established protocols for managing indirect cost allocation and intellectual property issues. The Institute will be proactive in identifying and pursuing federal and private funds that will enhance the ability of faculty to deploy and improve cutting edge research technologies. In this connection the Institute will administer an interdisciplinary seed grant program to fund new initiatives with a high probability of receiving extramural funding once preliminary data are acquired.
Faculty affiliated with the Institute will have better knowledge of and access to core research facilities, the opportunity to participate in biomedical and health related symposia sponsored by the Institute, and access to a range of visiting scholars in biomedical and health research. Perhaps most important, the Institute will help faculty attract and support larger numbers of highly qualified graduate students and postdocs to UGA’s programs in these fields. The Institute will also support and encourage innovative approaches to new instructional technologies at both the graduate and undergraduate level.
What will the Institute mean for UGA Students?
7.1 The Undergraduate Program
The Institute will offer an accelerated MS/BS program to challenge and attract some of the best undergraduate science students to the University who are interested in careers as biomedical researchers and health science professionals. Students arriving with AP credit will be able to complete a Bachelor of Science degree in Biomedical and Health Sciences and a Master of Science degree within five years of study, involving a health sciences core curriculum and a range of interdisciplinary learning opportunities. An affiliated BS/MS degree for students in existing departments is also a possibility. The BS/MS curriculum will consist in part of a health sciences core curriculum, a summer laboratory research experience, participation in an annual Undergraduate Research Day, access to competitive support for participation in national scientific meetings, and a scholarly thesis based on a senior project. The program will include involvement with other undergraduates, graduate students and faculty active in medically related, collaborative research and training. In addition to opportunities for ongoing graduate study within the Institute and in other UGA science programs, the institute will explore the development of direct linkages between the accelerated program and professional training in medicine, dentistry and nursing at the Medical College of Georgia. Such an inter-institutional relationship could enable UGA undergraduates to complete their first year of basic science requirements for such professional programs in their fourth year of study at UGA. Courses in the Institute’s Health Sciences curriculum will also be available to undergraduates in other basic science programs at UGA who wish to participate in specific learning opportunities. The Institute will also develop a yearlong preliminary studies program for undergraduates with a strong interest and likelihood of success in the accelerated program but who lack the necessary preparation in their high school years.
7.2 Graduate Programs
The Institute will offer graduate courses and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in the three biomedical and health science divisions of the Institute: Molecular Medicine, Infectious Disease and Immunity, and Public Health. The Institute’s mandatory core curriculum for all graduate programs will include a two semester Medical Science survey course that introduces students to the diversity of current biomedical and health science research, including but not limited to cell biology, biochemistry, epidemiology, genetics, immunology, microbiology, toxicology, and public health. The core will also include a one-semester course in Bioethics. These core courses will be available to qualified undergraduates in the Institute’s accelerated program as well.
Within each Division and in consultation with the BHSI Curriculum Committee, additional appropriate curriculum requirements will be established that fulfill the instructional and training mission of the Divisional programs, the requirements of UGA academic departments for jointly affiliated students, and Graduate School requirements. Five-member Graduate Student Advisory Committees supervising dissertations within the program will include at least three faculty of the Institute. One external evaluator will participate in the final dissertation evaluation. The Institute Director, Divisional Chairs and Advisory Board will participate in the yearly assessment of the graduate student program with the goal of identifying areas of potential expansion and support. The three divisions will cooperate in refining requirements regarding: admission, required courses, elective courses, laboratory rotations, graduate teaching experience, qualifying exams, and dissertations. It is anticipated that the educational requirements for the graduate programs will adopt features from the NIH Training Grant Guidelines for Graduate Study as an appropriate model.
The Biomedical Initiative has already secured funding for five ARCS Foundation Biomedical Science Fellowships to be awarded annually and will aggressively seek to develop additional funding sources for graduate students and postdoctoral fellows. It is anticipated that students in the biomedical and health science graduate programs will receive funding for travel to professional meetings, for special research opportunities, and graduation awards. The Institute will also support internship programs to provide practical interactions for advanced doctoral students with industry and in clinical research.
What will the Institute mean for existing Units?
The interdisciplinary nature of the new Institute and the breadth of its involvement with other programs throughout the university mandates consideration of issues such as faculty assignments, support for activities carried out in the Institute, and tenure and promotion criteria. Courses developed as part of the undergraduate and graduate curriculum will be supported by the Institute and made available to other curricula to enhance the richness of the educational experience for students in departments throughout the university. Administration of grants received via the Institute and the disposition of indirect costs will be addressed within the Office of the Vice President for Research, but it is expected that increases in extramural support will benefit all parties.
Participation with the Institute will have other significant positive impacts for the affiliated departments and programs, including increased visibility for departmental faculty participating in biomedical and health science initiatives at the Institute, increased opportunities for extramural sponsorship through involvement with interdisciplinary research programs and curricular collaborations, additional endowed chairs for faculty and graduate fellowships for students jointly affiliated with the Institute and the departments, as well as related improvements in recruitment for top faculty and top graduate students.
9. Basing the Institute on UGA Faculty Strengths
Based on the initial input of ten faculty working groups and the development of an inventory of UGA faculty research activity, various ways to structure programs were considered in order to capitalize on institutional strengths in the biomedical and health sciences while at the same time focusing resources to address weaknesses. The decision to propose an institute with a strong educational mission, including undergraduate and graduate programs, determined that the organizational structure would be based on disciplinary “content areas.” The most promising model devised by the committee to both encompass and distinguish known strengths would involve the development of three interrelated Divisions within the Institute: a Division of Molecular Medicine, a Division of Infectious Disease and Immunity, and a Division of Public Health.
In addition to these main content areas, the committee recognized that there are serious technological needs for biomedical research at UGA that impact all three content areas within the Institute. For this reason it was decided that in addition to having three content oriented divisions, the Institute also needed to function as an umbrella organization for technology initiatives. While genomics, proteomics, and bioinformatics programs, for example, are essential for a successful biomedical and health sciences initiative, these areas represent tools more than disciplines. They will, in time, become standard techniques for biomedical scientists just as cloning and the formation of genetically modified organisms have become routine. Even so, the critical need to improve access to and training in the use of these tools at UGA, in the present, argues for focused advocacy in this direction from within the Institute. The following sections offer more detail about the content within the proposed three divisions, and a listing of technology initiatives.
9.1 The Division of Molecular Medicine
Currently a diverse and excellent but relatively unconnected body of researchers in the area of molecular medicine exists at UGA. Publicly recognized programs in areas as apparently diverse as ethnobiology, glycobiology, structural biology, drug design, population genetics, and molecular parasitology exist, and many strengths in plant molecular biology could be profitably utilized in the biomedical arena. In addition, many lesser-known but high quality and well-supported research programs exist at UGA in this field. This fact was made apparent by the recent inventory of cancer related research programs currently in existence on campus that involve nearly eighty faculty.
UGA already has considerable research capability in the field of molecular medicine, including a strong overall equipment base, a hybridoma facility, multispecies animal models, the Animal Health Research Center which provides a BSL 3 biocontainment facility at the College of Veterinary Medicine, an ultrastructural facility, a BioXpress Lab, a fermentation facility, excellent analytical instrumentation augmented with technical expertise in the CCRC, a Genome Analysis Facility (GAF), an aquaculture facility through the College of Forestry and a developing applied genetics technologies facility. Collaborations that exist with Georgia Tech, the Emory University School of Medicine and the Centers for Disease Control will be enhanced by better integration of UGA resources and programs in this field. MCG’s Institute for Molecular Medicine and Genetics would be a natural source for increased collaboration with this division.
Coalescence of these researchers into the Institute structure will rapidly expand and strengthen the research program and extramural support of this group through the availability of seed grants, strong administrative support for collaborative ventures into new areas, and access to state-of-the-art core facilities. Moreover, there also currently exists acceptable strength in this area to sponsor and implement a graduate program in molecular medicine. Significant program expansion will be the outcome of collaborative ventures with clinicians and private industry. Faculty hires into areas of identified need such as human genetics and functional mammalian genomics will anchor UGA’s expansion to take advantage of federal research objectives as announced in, for example, the NIH Healthy People 2010 Initiative.
9.2 The Division of Infectious Disease and Immunity
At present there are a significant number of quality research programs at UGA in the field of infectious diseases and immunity. For example, the area of microbial pathogenesis, which seeks solutions to the threat of antimicrobial resistance, has strength in a number of faculty from several departments. The Animal Vaccine Development Resource in the College of Veterinary Medicine provides a central resource and expertise for the development, production, and testing of vaccines and diagnostics. The Center for Tropical and Emerging Global Diseases is an interdisciplinary center established in 1998 with its roots in the parasitology programs that bridged the College of Arts and Sciences, Veterinary Medicine, and Agriculture and Environmental Sciences. Additional resources can be found in UGA research directed at vector biology. Associated with this area are the behavioral science and policy issues which have an impact on the availability and use of therapeutic agents and vaccines to prevent and treat illnesses. At present there exist a sufficient body of faculty to form a highly functional division with an accompanying graduate program. However, many major areas with strong funding potential, such as human virology, immunology, and pathogenic microbiology are currently underrepresented. Moreover, high tech, state-of-the-art approaches to many research problems have been slow to develop at UGA.
Coalescence of current faculty into the Institute structure with the availability of interdisciplinary seed grants, staffed core facilities, aggressive leadership and support for generating ties with outside clinical and industrial entities, along with targeted hires into areas of need will support the rapid growth of research and funding in this area.
9.3 The Division of Public Health
Within UGA is a rich environment of research programs targeted towards solving problems in what is generally understood as the field of public health. Particular research strengths exist in the areas of disease prevention and management, violence prevention, health promotion and communication, addictions, family and health, aging, and behavioral science. These research specialties are distributed throughout a number of formal academic programs such as the Department of Health Promotion and Behavior, the Department of Environmental Health Science, the Department of Food Science and Technology, the Department of Psychology, the UGA School of Social Work, the College of Pharmacy, the College of Journalism and Mass Communication, and more. Faculty from these and other units also participate in such interdisciplinary institutes, centers and programs as the Institute for Behavioral Research, the Gerontology Center, the Center for Research on Behavioral Health and Human Service Delivery, the Center for Food Safety and Quality Enhancement, and the Interdisciplinary Program in Toxicology.
One way to assess our overall capability in this field is to compare UGA’s strengths with a traditional model based on the departmental areas within established US Schools of Public Health. In terms of the traditional departments of American Schools of Public Health, UGA has strengths in Behavioral Science and Health Education, Environmental Health Science, Toxicology, Food Safety, Health Communication, and Health Policy. Traditional areas where UGA is weak at present include Biostatistics, Epidemiology, Minority Health, and Environmental and Occupational Medicine.
Although UGA strengths do not encompass all the areas needed to create an accredited Public Health School, the institution does clearly have enough in place already to form a program offering an interdisciplinary MPH degree program for students jointly affiliated with other departments. A good model for forming the faculty and curriculum for such a program is to be found in the UGA Interdisciplinary Toxicology Program, whose faculty hold joint appointments and which also enables its students to retain their departmental status and to contribute to the enrollment, course credit and degree award statistics of those units. Longer-term goals for this Division include establishing a medical residency program in Athens for physicians in primary care and establishing a School of Public Health on the Athens campus. Georgia does not possess a publicly funded School of Public Health, but UGA already has strong programs in a majority of the areas required. This could be done in collaboration with MCG, which has existing academic components of relevance such as its Center for Health Care Improvement. This potential has been incorporated in the Provost’s most recent proposal to the Regents (see Appendix C).
10. Technology and Infrastructure Initiatives
The Institute will advocate for necessary technology and infrastructure resources that benefit biomedical and health science research across departmental boundaries. A primary effort at the outset will be to support a bioinformatics initiative involving a major commitment of UGA and other resources to expand into a more comprehensive bioinformatics capability to work with the large data sets that are being created by the “new biology” at UGA. Emphasis will also be put on initiatives in the related areas of structural and functional genomics, especially where these tools relate to biomedicine, molecular epidemiology, emerging diseases, antibiotic resistance, and environmental medical science. A magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) facility would be of great value in research areas such as oncology, developmental biology and neurobiology. The most pressing general infrastructural need is for improved, high speed and high volume connectivity for UGA laboratories and programs, especially to enhance off-site interactions. A first-rate transgenic mouse colony, a high-throughput core facility for generating monoclonal antibodies, and a microarray facility are all highly desirable. Over the longer term, development of a bioengineering program linked to technology initiatives could help stimulate the creation and application of new technology to solve problems in medicine and biology.
11. Linkages with Other Institutions
The Planning Committee decided early in its deliberations to first focus attention on characterizing the extent of UGA’s own resources and needs and to develop a broad strategy and administrative structure to strengthen Biomedical and Health Science programs internally, at the Athens campus. This would be the most pragmatic approach not only to bring improvements to UGA in the near term but also to create a basis for broader collaborations with outside organizations. The preceding sections of this report display, primarily, the considerable amount of biomedical and health science activity and resources at UGA and ways to link and improve these.
At the same time, extensive outside collaborations will be essential for UGA in these fields because of the need for both additional research contacts and interactions with the clinical community. Because of its strong basic research components, UGA has collaborative relationships in place and others developing with Emory, the CDC, the private medical facilities of Atlanta, and with institutions out of state. In addition, the committee was asked to look particularly closely at the potential for cooperation with the state’s only public medical school, the Medical College of Georgia (MCG) in Augusta.
There are significant opportunities to expand mutually beneficial collaborations between UGA and MCG. In addition to cooperative activities that have been in place for years, such as the pharmacy and nursing programs at both institutions, and individual research collaborations, there were several new developments involving both institutions during the past year. The Provost of UGA proposed an array of collaborations to strengthen both institutions, and received indications of support for these from the USG Chancellor, including support for grants for research involving faculty from UGA and MCG working in collaboration. The committee produced a draft RFP and selection process to put in place when support for collaborative research projects with MCG is in hand (Appendix C). Although the funding was not committed by the Chancellor, a series of positive interactions between the two institutions took place. The proposal to the Chancellor has been resubmitted. In the meantime, the first jointly funded UGA/MCG research collaboration was selected and supported with internal money from both schools.
There were other encouraging collaborations: 1) UGA provided the funding to hire an MCG faculty member part time to provide technical expertise for a nascent neuroimaging facility involving UGA faculty in Athens but with data available at both institutions via digital links and with the potential to involve additional MCG faculty; 2) two UGA faculty located at MCG in the College of Pharmacy have recently received NIH Minority Investigator Awards under sponsorship of NIH-funded investigators at MCG; 3) research collaborations in the field of obesity continued to evolve toward establishing a collaborative center; and 4) a conference center was established halfway between UGA and MCG because of faculty and administrative interest at both institutions, the advocacy of the Mayor of Washington, and the generosity of a UGA alumnus.
The Committee was asked to consider the benefits of close collaboration with MCG and developed a list of potential benefits (see Appendix B). Active cooperation could clearly benefit both institutions greatly—in terms of attracting research funding; improving education at both institutions and attracting top students; widening outreach and clinical activities; and streamlining the administration of collaborative activity. The advantage of cooperation should be more than additive. Simply combining the federal research totals for UGA and MCG would result in an overall research enterprise still very distant from the national research leaders. The real motivation should be to increase productivity dramatically—through the synergistic affects of matching the established basic research capability of UGA to MCG’s clinical and research programs.
An even more fundamental reason for cooperation should also be kept in mind: Georgians have some of the highest rates in the country for the prevalence of several major diseases, and the state’s best interests are aligned with addressing these issues through such existing state institutions as Georgia’s only public medical school (MCG) and Georgia’s premier institution for basic scientific research (UGA). Even so, the Committee felt that faculty could do little more at this time without high level administrative meetings between the leaders of the two institutions to determine the level of commitment on both sides for developing formally structured collaborations.
12. Next Steps
This advisory report to the Provost is intended for her consideration and possibly as a discussion document for others. The Committee understands that it may raise issues that will require further refinement and consensus building, but the general intention throughout the process has been to identify an appropriate academic structure for implementation to achieve the goals initially conceived and to address the many issues discovered and explored throughout the Committee’s deliberations.
Recommendation:
The Committee recommends the establishment of the UGA Biomedical and Health Sciences Institute to enhance linkages between researchers in multiple programs at UGA and at other institutions involved in biomedical and health research; to expand educational programs and opportunities; to give biomedical and health science activity at UGA better visibility and accessibility; and to improve funding for research in these fields.
