DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 416 078 SE 061 110

TITLE Federal Funds for Research and Development: Fiscal Years1995, 1996, and 1997. Volume 45.

INSTITUTION National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA. Div. of ScienceResources Studies.

REPORT NO NSF-97-327PUB DATE 1997-00-00NOTE 325p.AVAILABLE FROM National Science Foundation, Div. of Science Resources

Studies, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230.PUB TYPE Numerical/Quantitative Data (110) Reports Descriptive

(141)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC13 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *Annual Reports; *Budgets; *Federal Government; *Financial

Support; Full State Funding; *Research and Development;Tables (Data)

ABSTRACTThis annual report contains information on federal funding

of research and development for fiscal years 1995, 1996, 1997. Data in thetables of this report were derived from the Survey of Federal Funds forResearch and Development for Fiscal Years 1995, 1996, and 1997. They reflectresearch and development funding levels as reported by 33 federal agenciesfrom May through August 1996. Research and development totals in these tablesare given in both outlays and obligations. The research and developmentobligation data are further categorized according to character of work,performer, field of science or engineering, and Federal Research andDevelopment funding by State. This report consists of three sections. Thefirst section provides definitions of technical terms to the reader. Thesecond section lists federally funded research and development centers byagency and type of administration. Section three contains statistical tables.Appended are agencies included in this survey (volumes 26 to 45). (ASK)

********************************************************************************* Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made ** from the original document. *********************************************************************************

Federal Funds for

Research and

Development

Fiscal Years 1995, 1996, and 1997

Volume 45

Detailed Statistical Tables

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and ImprovementUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION

CENTER (ERIC)his ocument has been reproduced as

received from the person or organizationoriginating it.

Minor changes have been made toimprove reproduction quality.

Points of view or opinions stated in thisdocument do not necessarily representofficial OERI position or policy.

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

Division of Science Resources Studies

Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences

National Science Foundation NSF 97-327

Federal Funds for

Research and

Development

Fiscal Years 1995, 1996, and 1997

Volume 45

Detailed Statistical Tables

Ronald L. Meeks, Project Officer

Division of Science Resources Studies

Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences

National Science Foundationr.

3

NSF 97-327

Suggested CitationNational Science Foundation, Division of Science ResourcesStudies, Federal Funds for Research and Development:Fiscal Years 1995, 1996, and 1997, Volume 45, DetailedStatistical Tables, NSF 97-327, by Ronald L. Meeks(Arlington,VA, 1997).

Availability of PublicationsSingle copies are available free of charge from the

Division of Science Resources Studies, National ScienceFoundation, Arlington, VA 22230. SRS data are also availablethrough the World Wide Web (http: / /www.nsf.gov /sbe /srs/stats.htm). If you are a user of electronic mail and have accessto Internet, you may order publications electronically. Sendrequests to pubs@nsf.gov. In your request include the NSFpublication number and title, your name, and a complete mailingaddress. Printed publications may also be ordered by fax(703-644-4278). Please allow 3 weeks for delivery.

Telephonic Device for the Deaf

(703) 306-0090

4

ri

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThe preparation of Federal Funds for Research

and Development: Fiscal Years 1995, 1996, and 1997was managed by Ronald L. Meeks, Senior Analyst,National Science Foundation (NSF), Division ofScience Resources Studies (SRS), Research andDevelopment Statistics Program (RDS), under theoverall direction of John E. Jankowski, Jr., ProgramDirector, RDS, with guidance and review provided byJeanne E. Griffith, Division Director, SRS, and Alan R.Tupek, Deputy Division Director, SRS. Editorialassistance was provided by Anne M. Houghton,

Julia H. Harriston, and Tanya R. Gore of SRS. Quan-tum Research Corp. (QRC) of Bethesda, MD, underNSF contract number SRS-9421044, prepared thetables, general and technical notes, and report copy.QRC staff members who worked on this report wereHeidi L. Clark, Keri R. Fullmer, Gail H. Henry, HilaryE. Jones, Elizabeth H. Peto, and Jennifer D. Ranwez.Many thanks to Stephen D. Nelson of the AmericanAssociation for the Advancement of Science and toAlan I. Rapoport of SRS for their very helpful reviewof the Overview Section.

iii rJ

CONTENTS

Section Page

OVERVIEW vii

GENERAL NOTES xv

A. TECHNICAL NOTES 1

B. FEDERALLY FUNDED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTERS 1 1

C. DETAILED STATISTICAL TABLES 17

APPENDIX A. AGENCIES INCLUDED IN THIS SURVEY,

VOLUMES 26 TO 45 303

GETTING INFORMATION ON THE WORLD WIDE WEB

ORDER FORM

OVERVIEWplant in FY 1997 (Chart 1). The Department of De-fense (DOD) will still comprise the largest share (47percent), even though its funding will decrease 4percent from FYs 1996-97. Contributing to DOD'sdrop in overall R&D funding are Navy (14 percentdecrease), combined Defense agencies (12 percentdecrease), and the Army (its military functions compo-nent) (10percent decrease). Within the Defenseagencies, the Washington Headquarters Services(WHS) (down 23 percent), Special Operations Com-mand (down 20 percent), and Ballistic Missile DefenseOrganization (BMDO) (down 13 percent) report thelargest percentage decreases in proposed R&D fund-ing.

INTRODUCTIONFederal agencies expected their funding for re-

search and development (R&D) and R&D plant todecrease 1 percent (4-percent decrease in inflation-adjusted 1992 dollars) to $70 billion in fiscal year (FY)1997, according to survey reports received during theperiod May through August 1996. Developmentaccounts for the entire R&D decrease, declining by 4percent (a 6-percent decrease in constant 1992 dollars)from estimated FY 1996 levels (to $39 billion). Re-search spending (including basic and applied research)will increase 2 percent (to $29 billion). But afteradjusting for inflation, Federal obligations for researchwill decline slightly by 0.4 percent. Research wouldaccount for 42 percent of the FY 1997 R&D money.Also, R&D plant will increase 6 percent (a 3-percentincrease in constant 1992 dollars) to $2 billion. Theestimated obligations provided in this report are subjectto change as Federal agencies' budgets are updated toreflect approved programs.

AGENCY TOTAL FUNDING SHARESSeven Federal agencies, out of the 33 that report to

the R&D survey, account for 97 percent ($67 billion) oftotal projected Federal funding for R&D and R&D

Funding from the Department of Health andHuman Services (HHS) will comprise the secondlargest share of Federal agencies' R&D funding (18percent), increasing by 3 percent from the FY 1996level. Most (94 percent) of the HHS amount is fromits National Institutes of Health (NIH) for support ofthe life sciences. The other top funding agencies arethe National Aeronautics and Space Administration(NASA) (14 percent of the FY 1997 Federal R&D andR&D plant total), the Department of Energy (DOE) (10percent), the National Science Foundation (NSF) (4

Chart 1. Projected Federal obligations, by agency and character of work: 1997

R&D Plant

under 1%

Development

88%

Appliedreseach 8%

Basic

research 3%

R&D Plant

6%

Development

26%

Applied

reseach 32%

Basic

research 37%

SOURCE: NSF/SRS, Survey of Federal Funds for Research and Development: Fiscal Years 1995, 1996, and 1997.

vii

percent), the Department of Agriculture (USDA) (2percent), and the Department of Commerce (DOC)(nearly 2 percent). Almost all (99 percent) of DOC'sfunding is from its National Institute of Standards andTechnology (NIST) and National Oceanic and Atmo-spheric Administration (NOAA). NASA, DOC, andUSDA each project that combined R&D and R&Dplant funding will decline in FY 1997, whereas such

funding from DOE and NSF is slated to increase.

R&D GROWTH IN THE 1990sOf the seven major R&D funding agencies, DOC

reports the largest estimated R&D and R&D plantfunding annual growth rate for the FYs 1990-97 period(15 percent, 12 percent in constant 1992 dollars)

(Table 1). DOC's growth reflects the rapid increasesin funding at NIST. Even though reporting a projected9-percent decrease in overall R&D funding in FY1997, NIST increased its obligations from $131 million($141 million in constant dollars) in FY 1990 to $647million ($573 million in constant dollars) in FY 1997.However, the FY 1997 NIST R&D funding level isnearly back to what it was in FY 1995. HHS followsDOC with a 6-percent growth rate (3 percent in con-stant dollars during the same period). NSF expects itsR&D and R&D plant funding to average 5-percentgrowth per year (2 percent in constant dollars) fromFYs 1990-97. DOD's obligations will drop on average2 percent annually. In constant dollars, its funding willdecrease at an estimated annualized rate of 5 percentover this seven-year period.

Table 1. Federal Obligations for R&D and R&D Plant: Fiscal Years 1990-97

AgencyFY 1990

Actual

FY 1991

Actual

FY 1992

Actual

FY 1993

Actual

FY 1994

Actual

FY 1995

Actual

FY 1996

Preliminary

FY 1997

Preliminary

Average

Percentage

Change FYs

1990-97

(in millions of current dollars)

Total 65,831 64,148 68,577 70,415 69,427 71,012 71,048 70,149 0.9

DOD 37,756 32,561 36,526 36,221 34,788 34,427 34,369 33,004 -1.9

HHS 8,513 9,842 9,085 10,499 11,142 11,711 12,218 12,614 5.8

NASA 7,060 8,004 8,475 8,769 8,812 9,640 9,946 9,519 4.4

DOE 6,547 7,203 7,493 7,724 6,960 6,890 6,432 6,721 0.4

NSF 1,729 1,945 1,970 2,012 2,212 2,439 2,361 2,479 5.3

USDA 1,211 1,381 1,492 1,470 1,525 1,523 1,502 1,494 3.1

DOC 454 505 672 682 857 1,214 1,252 1,201 14.9

Other 2,562 2,707 2,864 3,038 3,131 3,168 2,968 3,117 2.8

(in millions of constant 1992 dollars)

Total 70,634 65,996 68,577 68,630 66,121 65,996 64,530 62,134 -1.8

DOD 40,510 33,498 36,526 35,303 33,131 31,995 31,216 29,233 -4.6

HHS 9,135 10,126 9,085 10,232 10,611 10,884 11,097 11,173 2.9

NASA 7,575 8,234 8,475 8,547 8,392 8,959 9,034 8,431 1.5

DOE 7,024 7,411 7,493 7,528 6,629 6,403 5,842 5,953 -2.3

NSF 1,855 2,001 1,970 1,961 2,107 2,267 2,144 2,196 2.4

USDA 1,299 1,421 1,492 1,433 1,452 1,415 1,364 1,323 0.3

DOC 487 520 672 664 816 1,128 1,137 1,064 11.8

Other 2,749 2,785 2,864 2,961 2,982 2,944 2,696 2,761 0.1

SOURCE: National Science Foundation/SRS Survey of Federal Funds for Research and Development: Fiscal Yea s 1995, 1996 and 1997.

Viii

8

DEVELOPMENT FUNDINGAs in the past, the Federal Government obligates

the largest portion of its R&D dollars for development,which accounts for approximately 55 percent of the FY1997 preliminary total R&D and R&D plant obliga-tions. However, the development share has beendecreasing throughout the 1990's, having declinedfrom its peak 64-percent share in FY 1990 (Chart 2).Agencies project development funds to drop 4 percent(down 6 percent in constant 1992 dollars) from theirFY 1996 level, to $39 billion ($34 billion in constant1992 dollars) in FY 1997.

Six agencies account for 99 percent of estimatedFederal development obligations in FY 1997 (Table 2).These agencies are DOD (more than three-fourths fromthe three service agenciesArmy, Navy, and AirForce), NASA, DOE, HHS (almost entirely from NIH),

Department of Transportation (DOT) (more than 90percent from the Federal Aviation Administration andFederal Highway Administration), and DOC (morethan three-fourths from NIST). However, after adjust-ing for inflation, all six of these agencies report anexpected decrease in development funding for FY1997: DOC (down 19 percent), NASA (down 9percent), DOD (down 6 percent), DOE (down 5percent), DOT (down 1 percent), and HHS (downunder 1 percent).

To better understand the component pieces ofFederal R&D funding and to allow a closer look at thefunding activity of DOD agencies that report to theFederal Funds Survey, NSF collects data on DODdevelopment dollars in two categories: advancedtechnology development and major systems develop-ment. Advanced technology includes development formilitary and nondefense applications. Major systems

Chart 2. Federal Obligations for R&D and R&D Plant: Fiscal Years 1990-97

Billions of 1992 constant dollars

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Development

111

0 Research & R&D Plant

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994Fiscal Years

1995

SOURCE: NSF/SRS, Survey of Federal Funds for Research and Development: Fiscal Years 1995, 1996, and 1997

ix

9

1996 1997

Table 2. Federal Obligations for Development: Fiscal Years 1990-97

AgencyFY 1990

Actual

FY 1991

Actual

FY 1992

Actual

FY 1993

Actual

FY 1994

Actual

FY 1995

Actual

FY 1996

Preliminary

FY 1997

Preliminary

Average annual

percent change,

FY 1990-97

(millions of current dollars)

Total 41,937 37,327 41,102 40,424 39,815 40,181 40,499 38,890 -1.1

DOD 33,739 28,417 32,056 31,066 30,304 30,028 30,336 29,103 -2.1

NASA 3,473 3,909 4,428 4,471 4,456 4,969 5,332 4,964 5.2

DOE 3,060 2,709 2,760 2,822 2,766 2,685 2,376 2,320 -3.9

HHS 939 1,594 1,042 1,157 1,285 1,379 1,390 1,417 6.1

DOT 247 265 288 319 347 356 307 311 3.3

DOC 61 40 55 74 108 244 275 227 20.6

USDA 47 61 66 76 77 80 150 82 8.3

Other 371 331 406 439 473 440 334 466 3.3

(millions of constant 1992 dollars)

Total 44,997 38,402 41,102 39,399 37,919 37,343 36,784 34,447 -3.7

DOD 36,201 29,235 32,056 30,278 28,861 27,907 27,553 25,778 -4.7

NASA 3,726 4,022 4,428 4,358 4,244 4,618 4,843 4,396 2.4

DOE 3,283 2,788 2,760 2,750 2,634 2,495 2,158 2,055 -6.5

HHS 1,007 1,639 1,042 1,127 1,224 1,282 1,262 1,255 3.2

DOT 265 273 288 311 331 331 279 276 0.5

DOC 66 41 55 72 103 226 249 201 17.4

USDA 51 63 66 74 74 75 136 73 5.4

Other 398 341 406 428 450 409 303 413 0.5

SOURCE: NSF/SRS, Survey of Federal Funds for Research and Development: Fiscal Years 1995, 1996, and 1997

include testing and evaluation of mostly defense-related systems. This Federal Funds volume is thesecond to include such statistics on developmentfunding.

DOD expects to provide $25 billion (86 percent ofits total development obligations) toward major sys-tems development, which represents a projected 2-percent drop in FY 1997 (down 4 percent in constant1992 dollars) (Table 3). Combined, the Air Force,Navy, Army (its Military Functions component), andBMDO expect to account for $23 billion (94 percent)of the estimated major systems development obliga-tions. However, three of these four funders expectdecreases in major systems development from FYs1996-97--Army and Navy expect to decline by 5.5percent and 15 percent, respectively, and BMDO isslated to drop by 11 percent. Air Force will increase its

funding more than $1 billion (12 percent), three timesthe increase from FYs 1995-96.

DOD projects that advanced technology develop-ment funding will decrease $0.7 billion (15 percent to$4 billion) in FY 1997. Six DOD agencies account fornearly all (97 percent) of the estimated advancedtechnology development funding. They are the De-fense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)($1 billion for advanced technology development),WHS ($0.7 billion), BMDO ($0.6 billion), and thethree service agencies, each with $0.5 billion. How-ever, each of these agencies reports an expecteddecrease in funding for advanced technology devel4-ment from FYs 1996-97--Army down by $300 million,WHS down by $181 million, BMDO down by $125million, and DARPA down by $103 million.

10

Table 3. Federal Obligations for Development by Agencies in DOD: Fiscal Years 1994-97

(millions of current dollars)

FY 1994 Actual FY 1995 ActualFY 1996

Preliminary

FY 1997

Preliminary

Percentage Change

FYs 1996-97

Total DOD

Basic Research 1,222 1,264 1,134 1,146 1.0

Applied Research 3,040 3,070 2,814 2,716 -3.5

Development 1/ 30,304 30,028 30,336 29,103 -4.1

Advanced Tech 4,461 4,578 4,829 4,101 -15.1

Major Systems 25,812 25,450 25,507 25,002 -2.0

Army

Development 4,721 4,567 4,184 3,701 -11.5

Advanced Tech 1,187 641 764 470 -38.4

Major Systems 3,514 3,926 3,421 3,231 -5.5

Navy

Development 8,082 8,083 7,863 6,728 -14.4

Advanced Tech 412 414 484 449 -7.2

Major Systems 7,670 7,669 7,379 6,279 -14.9

Air Force

Development 11,713 10,963 11,214 12,487 11.4

Advanced Tech 448 566 501 487 -2.8

Major Systems 11,265 10,398 10,713 12,000 12.0

Total Defense Agencies

Development 5,544 6,161 6,824 5,913 -13.3

Advanced Tech 2,414 2,958 3,080 2,695 -12.5

Major Systems 3,120 3,204 3,744 3,218 -14.0

1/ DOD development does not equal the sum of the advanced technology and majo systems

detail because some DOD agencies could not break down development into these two categories.

SOURCE: NSF/SRS, Survey of Federal Funds for Research and Development: Fiscal Years 1995, 1996, and 1997

BASIC RESEARCH FUNDINGBasic research support will reach almost $15

billion dollars, according to the preliminary FY 1997estimates. By comparison, Federal agencies reportapplied research funding will total just slightly morethan $14 billion. In constant 1992 dollars, basic re-search will decrease nearly 1 percent, and appliedresearch will remain flat.

The basic research share of Federal R&D obliga-tions has increased slowly since FY 1992. In FY 1992,basic research comprised 18 percent of the total R&D.That percentage increased slightly each year andreaches 21 percent in FY 1997, according to prelimi-nary estimates. Overall, Federal agencies report a 4-

percent average annual rate of growth (1 percent inconstant 1992 dollars) from FYs 1990-97. Whenadjusted for inflation, basic research funding has heldsteady at about $13 billion since FY 1993.

Six agencies provide 97 percent of the estimatedFederal basic research total in FY 1997 (Chart 3).They are HHS (almost entirely from NIH), NSF, DOE,NASA, DOD, and USDA. Of these six agencies, onlyNASA reports an expected decrease in basic researchfunding for FY 1997, dropping 6 percent (down $124million). Each of the other five agencies expects strongto modest increases in basic research funding: NSF (6percent); DOE (4 percent); USDA (4 percent); HHS (2percent); and the DOD (1 percent).

xi11

After adjusting for inflation, HHS expects itsobligations for basic research to average 2-percentannual growth from FYs 1990-97. DOE wouldincrease basic research funding second fastest, withjust under 2-percent real-dollar growth during the sametime period. NSF reports a basic research fundinggrowth rate of 1 percent, and DOD reveals a flat rate.In real dollars, USDA and NASA expect slightly lessfunding for basic research in FY 1997 than was avail-able in FY 1990.

PERFORMERS OF BASIC RESEARCHUniversities and colleges, receiving 50 percent of

the Federal basic research funds in FY 1997, mightexpect a 4.5-percent decrease in such obligations to$7.4 billion in that year (Chart 3). Intramural perform-ers of basic research, which covers Federal in-houseperformance and costs associated with the planning andadministration of both internal and external basicresearch programs by Federal personnel, are slated toreceive 18 percent of all Federal basic research funds.This represents a 10.5-percent increase over FY 1996funding, reversing the 11-percent drop from FYs 1995-

96. The largest Federal intramural basic researchperformers in FY 1997 include HHS, $1.1 billion(nearly all performed by NIH); NASA, $0.5 billion;USDA, $0.4 billion (91 percent from the AgriculturalResearch Service), and DOD, $0.3 billion (mostly fromthe three service agencies: Army, Navy, and Air Force)(Table 4). Federally Funded Research and Develop-ment Centers (such as Jet Propulsion Laboratory,Sandia National Laboratories, and Lincoln Laboratory)will receive 13 percent of the total basic researchfunds, or $2 billion. Industrial firms can expect toreceive 9 percent of the basic research, an increase of 4percent over the FY 1996 funding level. Non-academicnonprofit organizations might expect to receive nearly9 percent of the basic research funds, increasing morethan $0.2 billion (an increase of nearly 20 percent) overthe FY 1996 funding level. State and local govern-ments, which as a group will receive less than onepercent of all Federal basic research funds, and foreignperformers which will receive under a half percent ofbasic research funds, are projected to receive largepercentage increases for FY 1997, 31 percent and 13percent, respectively.

Chart 3. Distribution of Preliminary Federal Obligations for Basic Research by Agency,and by Performer: FY 1997

$411

Other

$1,146

DOD

8%

(Total = $14,732 Million)

$2,090

NSF

14%

$1,885

NASA

13%

By Agency

$1,270

$92 OtherState nonprofits $47

1% 9% Foreign

0%

B___---$7,405 $1,279

Universities &

Colleges

50%

Industrial

firms9%

By Performer

$2,668

Intramural

18%

$1,971FFRDCs

13%

SOURCE: NSF/SRS, Survey of Federal Funds for Research and Development: Fiscal Years 1995, 1996, and 1997

(in millions of current dollars)

.

Agency Total IntramuralIndustrial

FirmsAll FFRDCs

Univ. &

Colleges

Other

Nonprofits

State & Local

GovernmentsForeign

Total 14,732 2,668 1,279 1,971 7,405 1,270 92 47

DOD 1,146 293 153 5 647 39 0 9

HHS 6,558 1,142 270 154 3,928 973 64 27

NASA 1,885 471 614 258 480 56 1 3

DOE.... ...... 2,035 69 103 1,407 440 14 2 1

NSF 2,090 18 90 146 1,680 149 3 4

USDA 608 395 7 0 199 4 1 2

Other 411 280 41 0 31 35 23 1

SOURCE: NSF/SRS, Survey of Federal Funds for Research and Development: Fiscal Years 1995, 1996, and 1997

13

GENERAL NOTES

Data in the tables of this publication were derivedfrom the Survey of Federal Funds for Research andDevelopment, Volume 45, for fiscal years 1995-97.They reflect research and development (R&D) fundinglevels as reported by 33 Federal agencies in Maythrough August 1996. All agencies that conduct R&Dprograms were surveyed.

R&D totals in these tables are given in both outlaysand obligations. The R&D obligation data are furthercategorized according to character of work (basicresearch, applied research, and development), per-former, field of science or engineering (for research butnot for development), and Federal R&D funding byState. Obligations for research performance at univer-sities and colleges by fields of science or engineeringare also shown, as are R&D plant data.

The amounts reported for each year are expressedin obligations or outlays incurred, or expected to beincurred, in that year, regardless of when the funds mayhave been authorized, appropriated, or received by anagency, and regardless of whether the funds are identi-fied in an agency's budget specifically for research,development, or R&D plant.

Data for 1995 are actual, representing completedtransactions. Data for 1996 and 1997 are estimatedbecause they do not represent final actions. TheSurvey of Federal Funds for Research and Develop-ment was conducted during the third quarter of fiscalyear 1996. The amounts reported for 1996 reflectcongressional appropriation actions as of that period, as

xv

well as apportionment and reprogramming decisions asof that time. Data for 1997 represent administrationbudget proposals that had not been acted on. Authori-zation, appropriation, deferral, and apportionmentactions that were completed after these data werecollected will be reflected in later surveys of this series.

Accuracy of the data depends in part on the judg-ment of the respondent. Since many agency R&Dprograms are not identified as budget-line items,agency officials must identify R&D and R&D plantactivities within broader programs. Over the yearspersonnel of the participating agencies have developedincreasing skill and consistency in meeting the surveyrequirements, and their interaction with the NationalScience Foundation staff has considerably increasedthe reliability of the data.

Inquiries relating to Federal Funds for Researchand Development: Fiscal Years 1995, 1996, and 1997,Volume 45, should be directed to

Ronald L. MeeksResearch and Development Statistics ProgramDivision of Science Resources StudiesNational Science Foundation4201 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 965Arlington, VA 22230

Telephone: (703) 306-1772, ext. 6937Fax: (703) 306-0508Internet: rmeeks@nsf.gov

14

NoteFor trend comparison, use only the historical datafor fiscal years 1976-97 contained in tables C-89through C-109a in this Federal funds, Volume 45series. These tables incorporate changes in prior-year data made by the agencies to reflect programreclassifications. Do not use data published earlier.

15

SECTION A.

TECHNICAL NOTES

16

SCOPE AND METHODDuring the period May through August 1996, a

total of 33 Federal agencies and their subdivisions-98individual respondentssubmitted data in response tothe National Science Foundation's (NSF's) annualSurvey of Federal Funds for Research and Develop-ment (Federal funds survey), Volume 45, which wasdistributed in February 1996. The agencies reportedtheir data as obligations and outlays incurred, orexpected to be incurred, regardless of when the fundswere appropriated or whether they were identified inthe respondents' budgets specifically for research anddevelopment (R&D) activities.

Only those agencies that had obligations in thevariables represented by a particular table appear inthat table. For a complete list of the Federal agenciesthat have been included in the Federal funds survey,refer to appendix A.

DEFINITIONSThe definitions are essentially unchanged from

those used in past Federal funds surveys.

1. An agency is an organization of the FederalGovernment whose principal executive officerreports to the President. The Library ofCongress is also included in the survey, eventhough its chief officer reports to Congress.Subdivision refers to any organizational unitof a reporting agency, such as a bureau, divi-sion, office, or service.

2. Obligations and outlays reported are consis-tent with figures shown for fiscal years 1995,1996, and 1997 appearing in The Budget of theUnited States Government, Fiscal Year 1997.The R&D data in both agency submissionswere based on the same definitions and arereconcilable.

Obligations represent the amounts for ordersplaced, contracts awarded, services received,and similar transactions during a given period,regardless of when the funds were appropriatedand when future payment of money is required.

Outlays represent the amounts for checksissued and cash payments made during a given

3

period, regardless of when the funds wereappropriated.

Obligations and outlays cover all transactionsthat occurred in fiscal year 1995 and thoseestimated for fiscal years 1996 and 1997.

The data include all Federal funds available toan agency that the agency received or expectsto receive from direct appropriations, trustfunds, special account receipts, corporateincome, or other sources, including fundsappropriated to the President.

The amounts shown for each year reflectobligations or outlays for that year regardlessof when the funds were originally authorizedor received and regardless of whether or notthey were appropriated, received, or identifiedin the agency's budget specifically for re-search, development, or R&D plant.

In reporting its obligations or outlays, eachagency includes the amounts transferred toother agencies for support of research anddevelopment. The receiving agencies do notreport funds transferred to them. Similarly,a subdivision of an agency that transfers fundsto another subdivision within that agencyreports such obligations or outlays as its own.

Obligations and outlays for R&D performedfor an agency in foreign countries include allfunds available to the agency for this purpose,including funds separately appropriated forspecial foreign currency programs.

Funds reported for research and develop-ment reflect full cost coverage. In addition tocosts of specific R&D projects, the applicableoverhead costs are also included. The amountsreported include the costs of planning andadministering R&D programs, laboratoryoverhead, pay of military personnel, anddepartmental administration.

3. The fiscal year in the Federal Governmentaccounting period begins October 1 of a givenyear and ends September 30 of the followingyear; thus, fiscal year 1995 began on Octo-ber 1, 1994, and ended September 30, 1995.

17

4. Research, development, and R&D plantinclude all direct, incidental, or related costsresulting from, or necessary to, performance ofR&D and costs of R&D plant, defined asfollows, regardless of whether the R&D isperformed by a Federal agency (intramurally)or by private individuals and organizationsunder grant or contract (extramurally). R&Dexcludes routine product testing, qualitycontrol, mapping and surveys, collection ofgeneral purpose statistics, experimentalproduction, and the training of scientificpersonnel.

a. Research is systematic study directedtoward fuller scientific knowledge orunderstanding of the subject studied.Research is classified as either basic orapplied according to the objectives of thesponsoring agency.

In basic research the objective of thesponsoring agency is to gain more com-plete knowledge or understanding of thefundamental aspects of phenomena and ofobservable facts, without specific applica-tions toward processes or products in mind.

In applied research the objective of thesponsoring agency is to gain knowledge orunderstanding necessary for determiningthe means by which a recognized need maybe met.

b. Development is systematic use of theknowledge or understanding gained fromresearch, directed toward the production ofuseful materials, devices, systems, ormethods, including design and develop-ment of prototypes and processes. Itexcludes quality control, routine producttesting, and production.

To better differentiate between that part ofthe Federal R&D budget, which supports"science and key enabling technologies"(including for military and nondefenseapplications) and that which primarilyconcerns "testing and evaluation" (ofmostly defense-related systems), NSF now

4

16

collects from DoD development dollars intwo categories, advanced technologydevelopment and major systems develop-ment.

Within DoD's research categories, ad-vanced technology development is classi-fied as 6.3A. Major systems developmentis classified as 6.3B through 6.7 andincludes demonstration and validation,engineering and manufacturing develop-ment, management and support, andoperational system development.

c. Demonstration activities that are part ofR&D (i.e., that are intended to prove or totest whether a technology or method doesin fact work) are included. Demonstrationsintended primarily to make informationavailable about new technologies ormethods are excluded.

d. R&D plant (R&D facilities and fixedequipment, such as reactors, wind tunnels,and particle accelerators) includes acquisi-tion of, construction of, major repairs to, oralterations in structures, works, equipment,facilities, or land for use in R&D activitiesat Federal or non-Federal installations.Excluded from the R&D plant category areexpendable or movable equipment (e.g.,spectrometers, microscopes) and officefurniture and equipment. Also excludedare the costs of predesign studies (e.g.,those undertaken before commitment to aspecific facility). These excluded costs arereported under "total conduct of researchand development." Obligations for foreignR&D plant are limited to Federal funds forfacilities that are located abroad and usedin support of foreign research and develop-ment.

5. Fields of science and engineering in thissurvey consist of eight broad field categories,each consisting of a number of detailed fields.The broad fields are life sciences; psychology;physical sciences; environmental sciences;mathematics and computer sciences; engineer-ing; social sciences; and other sciences, notelsewhere classified. The term "not elsewhere

classified" (n.e.c.) is used for multidisciplinaryprojects within a broad field and for single-discipline projects for which a separate fieldhas not been assigned. The following listpresents the detailed fields grouped under eachof the broad fields, together with illustrativedisciplines of detailed fields.

The illustrative disciplines are intended to beguidelines, not sharp definitions; they representexamples of disciplines generally classifiedunder each detailed field. A discipline underone detailed field may be classified underanother detailed field when the major emphasisis elsewhere. Research in biochemistry, forexample, might be reported as biological,agricultural, or medical, depending on theorientation of the project. Human biochemis-try would be classified under biological, butanimal biochemistry or plant biochemistrywould fall under agricultural. In no case is theresearch reported under more than one field.No double-counting is intended or allowed.

a. Life sciences consist of five detailedfields: biological (excluding environmen-tal); environmental biology; agricultural;medical; and life sciences, n.e.c. Examplesof the disciplines under each of these fieldsare as follows:

Biological (excluding environ-mental): anatomy; biochemistry;biology; biometry and biostatistics;biophysics; botany; cell biology;entomology and parasitology; genetics;microbiology; neuroscience (biologi-cal); nutrition; physiology; zoology;other biological, n.e.c.

Environmental biology: ecosystemsciences; evolutionary biology; limnol-ogy; physiological ecology; populationand biotic community ecology; popula-tion biology; systematics; otherenvironmental biology, n.e.c.

Agricultural: agronomy; animalsciences; food science and technology;fish and wildlife; forestry; horticulture;phytopathology; phytoproduction;

19

plant sciences; soils and soil science;general agriculture; other agriculture,n.e.c.

Medical: dentistry; internal medicine;neurology; obstetrics and gynecology;ophthalmology; otolaryngology;pathology; pediatrics; pharmacology;pharmacy; preventive medicine;psychiatry; radiology; surgery; veteri-nary medicine; other medical, n.e.c.

Life sciences, n.e.c.

b. Psychology deals with behavior, mentalprocesses, and individual and groupcharacteristics and abilities. Psychology inthis survey is divided into three categories:biological aspects; social aspects; andpsychological sciences, n.e.c. Examples ofthe disciplines under each of these fieldsare as follows:

Biological aspects: animal behavior;clinical psychology; comparativepsychology; ethology; experimentalpsychology

Social aspects: development andpersonality; educational, personnel,and vocational psychology and testing;industrial and engineering psychology;social psychology

Psychological sciences, n.e.c.

c. Physical sciences are concerned withunderstanding of the material universe andits phenomena. They comprise the fieldsof astronomy; chemistry; physics; andphysical sciences, n.e.c. Examples ofdisciplines under each of these fields are asfollows:

Astronomy: laboratory astrophysics;optical astronomy; radio astronomy;theoretical astrophysics; X-ray,gamma-ray, and neutrino astronomy

Chemistry: inorganic; organic;organometallic; physical

Physics: acoustics; atomic andmolecular; condensed matter; elemen-tary particle; nuclear structure; optics;plasma

Physical sciences, n.e.c.

d. Environmental sciences (terrestrial andextraterrestrial) are, with one exception,concerned with the gross nonbiologicalproperties of the areas of the solar systemthat directly or indirectly affect humansurvival and welfare. The one exception isthat obligations for studies pertaining tolife in the sea or other bodies of water arereported as support of oceanography andnot biology. Environmental sciencescomprise the fields of atmospheric sci-ences; geological sciences; oceanography;and environmental sciences, n.e.c. Ex-amples of disciplines under each of thesefields are as follows:

Atmospheric sciences: aeronomy;extraterrestrial atmospheres; meteorol-ogy; solar; weather modification

Geological sciences: engineeringgeophysics; general geology; geodesyand gravity; geomagnetism; hydrology;inorganic geochemistry; isotopicgeochemistry; laboratory geophysics;organic geochemistry; paleomag-netism; paleontology; physical geogra-phy and cartography; seismology; soilsciences

Oceanography: biological oceanogra-phy; chemical oceanography; marinegeophysics; physical oceanography

Environmental sciences, n.e.c.

e. Mathematics and computer sciencesemploy logical reasoning with the aid ofsymbols and are concerned with thedevelopment of methods of operationemploying such symbols and, in the case ofcomputer sciences, with the application ofsuch methods to automated informationsystems. Examples of disciplines underthese fields are as follows:

(2 0

Mathematics: algebra; analysis;applied mathematics; foundations andlogic; geometry; numerical analysis;statistics; topology

Computer sciences: computer andinformation sciences (general); design,development, and application ofcomputer capabilities to data storageand manipulation; information sci-ences and systems; programminglanguages; systems analysis

Mathematics and computer sciences,n.e.c.

f. Engineering is concerned with studiesdirected toward developing engineeringprinciples or toward making specificprinciples usable in engineering practice.Engineering in this survey is divided intoeight fields: aeronautical; astronautical;chemical; civil; electrical; mechanical;metallurgy and materials; and engineering,n.e.c. Examples of disciplines under eachof these fields are as follows:

Aeronautical: aerodynamics

Astronautical: aerospace; spacetechnology

Chemical: petroleum; petroleumrefining; process

Civil: architectural; hydraulic; hydro-logic; marine; sanitary and environ-mental; structural; transportation

Electrical: communication; elec-tronic; power

Mechanical: engineering mechanics

Metallurgy and materials: ceramic;mining; textile; welding

Engineering, n.e.c.: agricultural;bioengineering; biomedical; industrialand management; nuclear; ocean;systems

g. Social sciences are directed toward anunderstanding of the behavior of socialinstitutions and groups and of individualsas members of a group. Social sciencesinclude anthropology; economics; politicalscience; sociology; and social sciences,n.e.c. Examples of disciplines under thefields of social science are as follows:

Anthropology: applied anthro-pology; archaeology; cultural andpersonality; social and ethnology

Economics: economic systems anddevelopment; econometrics andeconomic statistics; history of eco-nomic thought; industrial, labor, andagricultural economics; internationaleconomics; macroeconomics;microeconomics; public finance andfiscal policy; theory

Political science: area or regionalstudies; comparative government;history of political ideas; internationalrelations and law; national politicaland legal systems; political theory;public administration

Sociology: comparative and historical;complex organizations; culture andsocial structure; demography; groupinteractions; social problems andsocial welfare; sociological theory

Social sciences, n.e.c.: linguistics;research in education; research inhistory; research in law (e.g., attemptsto assess impact on society of legalsystems and practices); socioeconomicgeography

h. Other sciences, n.e.c.: This category isused for multidisciplinary or inter-disci-plinary projects that cannot be classifiedwithin one of the broad fields of sciencealready listed.

6. A performer is either an intramural group ororganization carrying out an operationalfunction or an extramural organization or

7

21

person receiving support or providing servicesunder a contract or grant.

a. Intramural performers are the agenciesof the Federal Government. Their work iscarried on directly by agency personnel.Obligations reported under this categoryare for activities performed or to beperformed by the reporting agency itself orrepresent funds that the agency transfers toanother Federal agency for performance ofwork as long as the ultimate performeris that agency or any Federal agency. Ifthe ultimate performer is not a Federalagency, the funds so transferred arereported by the transferring agency underthe appropriate extramural performercategory (universities and colleges, othernonprofit institutions, or industrial firms).

NOTE: Intramural activities cover notonly the actual intramural R&D perfor-mance, but also the costs associated withthe planning and administration of bothintramural and extramural programs byFederal personnel. Intramural activitiesalso include the costs of supplies andequipment, essentially of an "off-the-shelf " nature, that are procured for use inintramural R&D. For example, the pur-chase from an extramural source of anoperational launch vehicle (i.e., one thathas gone beyond the development orprototype stage) that is used for intramuralperformance of R&D is reported as a partof the cost of intramural R&D.

b. Extramural performers are organi-zations outside the Federal sector thatperform R&D with Federal funds undercontract, grant, or cooperative agreement.Only those costs associated with actualR&D performance are reported, but thesecosts would include costs of materials andsupplies to carry out R&D activities. Note,however, that the costs of off-the-shelfsupplies and equipment required to supportintramural R&D and procured fromextramural suppliers are considered as partof the costs of intramural performance andnot as part of the costs of extramuralperformance.

Extramural performers are identified asfollows:

i. Industrial firms: Organizationsthat may legally distribute netearnings to individuals or to otherorganizations.

ii. Universities and colleges: Institu-tions engaged primarily in provid-ing resident and/or accreditedinstruction for at least a one-yearprogram above the secondaryschool level. Included are collegesof liberal arts; schools of arts andsciences; professional schools, asin engineering and medicine,including affiliated hospitals andassociated research institutes; andagricultural experiment stations.

iii. Other nonprofit institutions:Private organizations other thaneducational institutions whose netearnings in no part inure to thebenefit of a private stockholder orindividual and other privateorganizations organized for theexclusive purpose of turning overtheir entire net earnings to suchnonprofit organizations.

iv. Federally funded research anddevelopment centers (FFRDCs):R&D-performing organizationsthat are exclusively or substan-tially financed by the FederalGovernment and are supported bythe Federal Government either tomeet a particular R&D objectiveor, in some instances, to providemajor facilities at universities forresearch and associated trainingpurposes. Each center is adminis-tered either by an industrial firm, auniversity, or another nonprofitinstitution.

In general, all of the followingcriteria are met by an organizationthat is included in the FFRDCcategory:

8

22

(1) Its primary activities includeone or more of the following:basic research, applied re-search, development, ormanagement of research anddevelopment (specificallyexcluded are organizationsengaged primarily in routinequality control and testing,routine service activities,production, mapping andsurveys, and informationdissemination);

(2) It is a separate operational unitwithin the parent organizationor is organized as a separatelyincorporated organization;

(3) It performs actual research anddevelopment or R&D manage-ment either upon direct requestby the Federal Government orunder a broad charter from theFederal Government but ineither case under the directmonitorship of the FederalGovernment;

(4) It receives its major financialsupport (70 percent or more)from the Federal Government,usually from one agency;

(5) It has, or is expected to have, along-term relationship with itssponsoring agency (about 5years or more), as evidencedby specific obligations as-sumed by it and the agency;

(6) Most or all of its facilities areowned by, or are funded undercontract with, the FederalGovernment; and

(7) It has an average annualbudget (operating and capitalequipment) of at least$500,000.

v. State and local governments:State and local governmentagencies, excluding State or localuniversities and colleges, agricul-tural experiment stations, medicalschools, and affiliated hospitals.(Federal R&D funds obligateddirectly to such State and localinstitutions excluded in thiscategory are included under the"Universities and colleges"category in this report.) R&Dactivities under the State and localcategory are performed either bythe State or local agencies them-selves or by other organizationsunder grants or contracts fromsuch agencies. Regardless of theultimate performer, Federal R&Dfunds directed to State and localgovernments are reported underthis sector and no other.

vi. Foreign performers: Foreigncitizens, foreign organizations, orforeign governments, as well asinternational organizations (suchas the North Atlantic TreatyOrganization (NATO), UnitedNations Educational, Scientific,and Cultural Organization(UNESCO), and World HealthOrganization (WHO)), performingR&D work abroad financed by theFederal Government. Excludedare U.S. agencies, organizations, orcitizens performing R&D abroadfor the Federal Government; thesurvey does not seek informationon "offshore" payments. Anexception is made in the case ofU.S. citizens performing R&Dabroad under special foreigncurrency funds; these activities areincluded under "Foreign perform-ers." Foreign scientists performingin the United States are excluded,however.

vii. Private individuals: For caseswherein an R&D grant or contractis awarded directly to a private

individual, obligations incurred areplaced under "Industrial firms."

7. Federal obligations for research performedat universities and colleges, by detailed fieldof science: Only six agencies participate in theportion of the survey covering the funding ofresearch at universities and colleges by de-tailed field of science. These six agenciesrepresent approximately 96 percent of theFederal research obligations to universities andcolleges. The six agencies are the Departmentsof Agriculture, Defense, Energy, and Healthand Human Services; the National Aeronauticsand Space Administration (NASA); and theNational Science Foundation (NSF).

8. Geographic distribution of 1995 R&Dobligations

9

23

a. Only the 10 largest R&D funding agenciesparticipate in the portion of the surveycovering the geographic distribution ofobligations for research and developmentand R&D plant. These 10 agenciesaccounted for approximately 98 percent oftotal Federal R&D and R&D plant obliga-tions in 1995. The respondents are theDepartments of Agriculture, Commerce,Energy, Defense, Health and HumanServices, the Interior, and Transportation;the Environmental Protection Agency;NASA; and NSF.

b. Actual fiscal year 1995 data were re-quested in terms of the principal location(State or outlying area) where the workwas performed by the primary contractor,grantee, or intramural organization. Whenthis information was not available in theirrecords, the respondents were asked toassign the obligations to the state, outlyingarea, or office abroad where the headquar-ters of the U.S. primary contractor, grantee,or intramural organization was located.

c. Obligations were reported for R&D as acombined amount.

d. Specifically omitted from the geographicportion of the survey were R&D obliga-tions to foreign performers and support of

foreign performers. Foreign performerdata, by country, are reported in a separatesection of the Federal funds survey.

CHANGES IN REPORTINGWhile completing the survey forms each year,

agency respondents make revisions to their estimatesfor the latest 2 years of the previous report, in this casefiscal years 1995 and 1996. Such revision is part of thebudgetary cycle. From time to time survey submis-sions also reflect reappraisals and revisions in classifi-cation of various aspects of agencies' R&D programs.When such revisions occur, NSF requires the agenciesto provide revised prior-year data to maintain consis-tency and comparability with the most recent concepts.

LIMITATIONS OF THE DATAFunds for research and development were reported

on a three-year basis comparable with the 1997 budget,upon which the data were based. The amounts re-ported for each year, as already stated, are the obliga-tions or outlays incurred in that year, regardless ofwhen funds were authorized or received by an agencyand regardless of whether the funds were identified inthe agency's budget specifically for research, develop-ment, R&D plant, or some combination of the three.

The respondents reconciled the data reported to theFederal funds survey with the amounts for R&D theyreported to the Office of Management and Budget forthe 1997 budget.

Some agencies are not able to report the full costsof research and development. For example, the head-quarters costs of planning and administering R&Dprograms of the Department of Defense (DoD) (esti-mated at a fraction of 1 percent of the agency's R&Dtotal) are excluded, because this agency has stated thatidentification of the amounts is impracticable.

R&D plant data are also underreported to someextent because of the difficulty encountered by someagencies, particularly DoD and NASA, in identifyingand reporting these data. DoD's respondents reportobligations for the R&D plant funded under theagency's construction appropriation, but they are ableto identify only a small portion of the R&D plantsupport that is within R&D contracts funded fromDoD's appropriation for research, development, testing,and evaluation. Similarly, NASA respondents cannotseparately identify the portions of industrial R&Dcontracts that apply to R&D plant; R&D plant data aresubsumed in the R&D data covering industrial perfor-mance. NASA R&D plant data for other performingsectors are reported separately.

10

24

SECTION B.

FEDERALLY FUNDED RESEARCH AND

DEVELOPMENT CENTERS, BY AGENCY AND

TYPE OF ADMINISTRATION

The following is the master list of federally fundedresearch and development centers (FFRDCs) includedin the Federal funds survey for fiscal years 1995-97.The list is arranged by sponsoring agency and adminis-

tering organization. Respondents reported under theFFRDC category those funds obligated to centersidentified on this list.

Federally

Sponsoring agency

funded R&D centers, by

Administered by

universities and colleges 1

agency and type of administration

Administered by other2

nonprofit Institutions

Administered by

industrial firms

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE:

Office of the Secretary

of Defense

Institute for Defense Analyses

Studies and Analyses FFRDC

(Institute for Defense Analyses),

Alexandria, VA

Logistics Management Institute

(Logistics Management

Institute). McLean. VA3

National Defense Research

Institute (RAND Core),Santa Monica, CA

C3l Federally Funded Research

and Development Center

(MITRE Coro 5l. Bedford. MA.and McLean, VA

Defense Advanced Research

Projects Agency

Software Engineering Institute

(Carnegie Mellon University),

Pittsburgh, PA

National Security Agency Institute for Defense Analyses

Communications and Computing

Federally Funded Research and

Development Center' (Institutefor Defense Analyses),

Alexandria, VA

Department of the Navy Center for Naval Analyses (The

CNA Corp.), Alexandria, VA

Department of the Air Force Unco In Laboratory

(Massachusetts Institute of

Technology), Lexington, MA

Aerospace Federally Funded

Research and Development

Center (The Aerospace Corp.),

El Segundo, CA

Project Air Force (RAND

Corp.4), Santa Monica, CA

Department of the Armv6 Arroyo Center (RAND Coro.").Santa Monica, CA

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Ames Laboratory (Iowa State

University of Science and

Technology), Ames, IA

Argonne National Laboratory

(University of Chicago),

Argonne, IL

Brookhaven National

Laboratory (Associated

Universities, Inc.), Upton,

Long Island, NY

National Renewable Energy

Laboratorv6 (Midwest Research

Institute), Golden, CO

Pacific Northwest National

Laboratory (Battelle Memorial

Institute), Richland, WA

Idaho National Engineering

Laboratory (Lockheed Martin

Idaho Technologies Company),

Idaho Falls, ID

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

(Lockheed Martin Energy

Research Corp.), Oak Ridge, TN

Sandia National Laboratories

(Sandia Corp., a subsidiary of

Lockheed Martin Corp.),

Albuquerque, NM

See explanatory information, if any, and SOURCE at end of table.

13

26BEST COPY AVAIL/ABLE

Federally funded research and development centers, by agency and type of administrationContinued

Sponsoring agency

Administered by

universities and colleges'

Administered by other

nonprofit institutions2

Administered by

Industrial firmsDEPARTMENT OF ENERGY8

continued Ernest Orlando LawrenceBerkeley National Laboratory

(University of California),

Berkeley, CA

Fermi National Accelerator

Laboratory (Universities

Research Association, Inc.),

Batavia, IL

Lawrence Livermore National

Laboratory (University of

California), Livermore, CA

Los Alamos National Laboratory

(University of California),

Los Alamos, NM

Oak Ridge Institute for Science

and Education (Oak Ridge

Associated Universities, Inc.),

Oak Ridge, TN

Princeton Plasma Physics

Laboratory (Princeton

University), Princeton, NJ

Stanford Linear Accelerator

Center (Leland Stanford Junior

University), Stanford, CA

Thomas Jefferson National

Accelerator Facility

(Southeastern Universities

Research Association, Inc.),

Newport News, VA 10

Savannah River Technology

Center (Westinghouse Savannah

River Co.), Aiken, SC

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

AND HUMAN SERVICES:

National Institutes of Health NCI Frederick Cancer Research

and Development Center

(Science Applications

International Corp.; Advanced

BioScience Laboratories, Inc.;

Charles River Laboratories, Inc.;

Data Management Services,

Inc.), Frederick, MD

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS

AND SPACE

ADMINISTRATION

Jet Propulsion Laboratory

(California Institute of

Technology), Pasadena, CA

See explanatory information, if any, and SOURCE at end of table.

4- (.4

14

Federally funded research

Sponsoring agency

and development centers, by agency and type of administrationContinued

Administered by other

nonprofit institutions2

Administered by

industrial firms

Administered by

universities and colleges'NATIONAL SCIENCE

FOUNDATION

National Astronomy and

Ionosphere Center (Cornell

University), Arecibo, PR

National Center for

Atmospheric Research

(University Corp. for

Atmospheric Research),

Boulder, CO

National Optical Astronomy

Observatories" (Association ofUniversities for Research in

Astronomy, Inc.), Tucson, AZ

National Radio Astronomy

Observatory (Associated

Universities, Inc.),

Green Bank, WV

Critical Technologies Institute

(RAND Coro.4). Washington. DC

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Center for Nuclear Waste

Regulatory Analyses (Southwest

Research Institute),

San Antonio, TX

DEPARTMENT OF

TRANSPORTATION:

Federal Aviation

Administration

Center for Advanced Aviation

System Development (MITRE

Corp.5), McLean, VA

DEPARTMENT OF THE

TREASURY:

Internal Revenue Service Tax Systems Modernization

Institute (IIT Research

Institute), Lanham, MD

Includes university consortia.

2 That is, other than universities and colleges.

3 Logistics Management Institute moved from Bethesda, MD, to McLean, VA, in May 1994.

° The following portions of the RAND Corp. are FFRDCs: National Defense Research Institute (formerly Defense/Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff), Project Air Force, the

Arroyo Center, and the Critical Technologies Institute. All other agency support to RAND is reported under "other nonprofit institutions excluding FFRDCs."

5 Only the C31 Federally Funded Research and Development Center and the Center for Advanced Aviation System Development parts of the MITRE Corp. are FFRDCs.All other agency support to MITRE is reported under "other nonprofit institutions excluding FFRDCs."

The Department of the Army decertified the Institute for Advanced Technology (University of Texas), Austin, TX, as an FFRDC in November 1993.

Although the Institute for Defense Analyses Communications and Computing FFRDC has been in existence since 1956, the Department of Defense added it to theMaster Government List of FFRDCs for the first time in October 1995.

° The Department of Energy decertified Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory, Hanford Engineering Development Laboratory, and Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory as FFRDCs

in October/November 1992. The Department of Energy removed from the Master Government List of FFRDCs (1) the Energy Technology Engineering Center inNovember 1995 and (2) the Inhalation Toxicology Research Institute in May 1996.

9 In September 1991 the name was changed from Solar Energy Research Institute.

In May 1996 the name was changed from Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility.

Since February 1984 this center has included three former FFRDCs: Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory, Kitt Peak National Observatory, and the National SolarObservatory (formerly Sacramento Peak Observatory).

I0

11

SOURCE: National Science Foundation/SRS

Updates of this list and an Annotated List of FFRDCs are available at http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/ffrdc96/start.htm.

15

28

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

SECTION C.

DETAILED STATISTICAL TABLES

29

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND R&D PLANT

C-1. Federal obligations for research and development, by character of work,and R&D plant: fiscal years 1951-97 31

C-2. Summary of Federal funds for research and development and for R&D plant:fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997 32

C-3. Federal funds for research and development and for R&D plant, by agency:fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997 34

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENTAGENCY, CHARACTER OF WORK,

AND PERFORMER

C-4. Federal funds for total research and development,by agency: fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997 37

C-5. Federal obligations for total research and development,by agency and character of work: fiscal year 1995 40

C-6. Preliminary Federal obligations for total research and development,by agency and character of work: fiscal year 1996 43

C-7. Preliminary Federal obligations for total research and development,by agency and character of work: fiscal year 1997 46

C-8. Federal obligations for total research and development,by agency and performer: fiscal year 1995 49

C-9. Preliminary Federal obligations for total research and development,by agency and performer: fiscal year 1996 53

C-10. Preliminary Federal obligations for total research and development,by agency and performer: fiscal year 1997 57

C-11. Federal obligations for research and development and for R&D plantto federally funded research and development centers,by agency: fiscal year 1995 61

C-12. Preliminary Federal obligations for research and developmentand for R&D plant to federally funded research and development centers,by agency: fiscal year 1996

19

62

Table Page

C-13. Preliminary Federal obligations for research and developmentand for R&D plant to federally funded research and development centers,by agency: fiscal year 1997 63

C-14. Federal obligations for research and development to federally funded researchand development centers (FFRDCs), by individual FFRDCand agency: fiscal year 1995 64

C-15. Federal obligations for R&D plant to federally funded researchand development centers (FFRDCs), by individual FFRDCand agency: fiscal year 1995 66

TOTAL RESEARCHAGENCY, PERFORMER, AND FIELD OF SCIENCE

AND ENGINEERING

C-16. Federal obligations for research, by agency and performer: fiscal year 1995 67

C-17. Preliminary Federal obligations for research, by agency and performer:fiscal year 1996 70

C-18. Preliminary Federal obligations for research, by agency and performer:fiscal year 1997 73

C-19. Federal obligations for research, by detailed field of scienceand engineering: fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997 76

C-20. Federal obligations for research, by agency and field of scienceand engineering: fiscal year 1995 77

C-21. Preliminary Federal obligations for research, by agency andfield of science and engineering: fiscal year 1996 80

C-22. Preliminary Federal obligations for research, by agency andfield of science and engineering: fiscal year 1997 83

C-23. Federal obligations for research in psychology and life sciences,by agency and detailed field of science: fiscal year 1995 86

C-24. Federal obligations for research in physical and environmental sciences,by agency and detailed field of science: fiscal year 1995 88

C-25. Federal obligations for research in engineering, by agencyand detailed field of engineering: fiscal year 1995 90

C-26. Federal obligations for research in mathematics and computer sciencesand in social sciences, by agency and detailed field of science:fiscal year 1995 92

20

31

Table Page

BASIC RESEARCHAGENCY, PERFORMER, AND FIELD OF SCIENCE

AND ENGINEERING

C-27. Federal obligations for basic research, by agency and performer:fiscal year 1995 94

C-28. Preliminary Federal obligations for basic research, by agencyand performer: fiscal year 1996 96

C-29. Preliminary Federal obligations for basic research, by agencyand performer: fiscal year 1997 98

C-30. Federal obligations for basic research, by detailed field of scienceand engineering: fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997 100

C-31. Federal obligations for basic research, by agency and field of scienceand engineering: fiscal year 1995 101

C-32. Preliminary Federal obligations for basic research, by agencyand field of science and engineering: fiscal year 1996 103

C-33. Preliminary Federal obligations for basic research, by agencyand field of science and engineering: fiscal year 1997 105

C-34. Federal obligations for basic research in psychology and life sciences,by agency and detailed field of science: fiscal year 1995 107

C-35. Federal obligations for basic research in physical and environmental sciences,by agency and detailed field of science: fiscal year 1995 108

C-36. Federal obligations for basic research in engineering, by agencyand detailed field of engineering: fiscal year 1995 109

C-37. Federal obligations for basic research in mathematics and computer sciencesand in social sciences, by agency and detailed field of science:fiscal year 1995 110

APPLIED RESEARCHAGENCY, PERFORMER, AND FIELD OF SCIENCE

AND ENGINEERING

C-38. Federal obligations for applied research, by agency and performer:fiscal year 1995 111

C-39. Preliminary Federal obligations for applied research, by agency andperformer: fiscal year 1996 114

21

32

Table Page

C-40. Preliminary Federal obligations for applied research, by agency andperformer: fiscal year 1997 117

C-41. Federal obligations for applied research, by detailed field of scienceand engineering: fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997 120

C-42. Federal obligations for applied research, by agency and field of scienceand engineering: fiscal year 1995 121

C-43. Preliminary Federal obligations for applied research, by agency andfield of science and engineering: fiscal year 1996 124

C-44. Preliminary Federal obligations for applied research, by agency andfield of science and engineering: fiscal year 1997 127

C-45. Federal obligations for applied research in psychology and life sciences,by agency and detailed field of science: fiscal year 1995 130

C-46. Federal obligations for applied research in physical and environmentalsciences, by agency and detailed field of science: fiscal year 1995 132

C-47. Federal obligations for applied research in engineering, by agencyand detailed field of engineering: fiscal year 1995 134

C-48. Federal obligations for applied research in mathematics and computersciences and in social sciences, by agency and detailed field of science:fiscal year 1995 136

DEVELOPMENTAGENCY AND PERFORMER

C-49. Federal obligations for development, by agency and performer:fiscal year 1995 139

C-50. Preliminary Federal obligations for development, by agencyand performer: fiscal year 1996 142

C-51. Preliminary Federal obligations for development, by agencyand performer: fiscal year 1997 145

R&D PLANTAGENCY AND PERFORMER

C-52. Federal funds for R&D plant, by agency: fiscal years1995, 1996, and 1997 148

C-51 Federal obligations for R&D plant, by agency and performerof the research and development the plant supports: fiscal year 1995 150

22

33

Table Page

C-54. Preliminary Federal obligations for R&D plant, by agency and performerof the research and development the plant supports: fiscal year 1996 152

C-55. Preliminary Federal obligations for R&D plant, by agency and performerof the research and development the plant supports: fiscal year 1997 154

TOTAL RESEARCH PERFORMED AT UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES

AGENCY AND FIELD OF SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

C-56. Federal obligations for research performed at universities and colleges, bydetailed field of science and engineering: fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997 156

C-57. Federal obligations for research performed at universities and colleges,by agency and field of science and engineering: fiscal year 1995 157

C-58. Preliminary Federal obligations for research performed at universities andcolleges, by agency and field of science and engineering: fiscal year 1996 158

C-59, Preliminary Federal obligations for research performed at universities andcolleges, by agency and field of science and engineering: fiscal year 1997 159

C-60. Federal obligations for research performed at universities and colleges inpsychology and life sciences, by agency and detailed field of science:fiscal year 1995 160

C-61. Federal obligations for research performed at universities and colleges inphysical and environmental sciences, by agency and detailed field of science:fiscal year 1995 161

C-62. Federal obligations for research performed at universities and colleges inengineering, by agency and detailed field of engineering: fiscal year 1995 162

C-63. Federal obligations for research performed at universities and collegesin mathematics and computer sciences and in social sciences,by agency and detailed field of science: fiscal year 1995 163

BASIC RESEARCH PERFORMED AT UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES

AGENCY AND FIELD OF SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

C-64. Federal obligations for basic research performed at universities and colleges,by detailed field of science and engineering: fiscal years1995, 1996, and 1997 164

C-65. Federal obligations for basic research performed at universities and colleges,by agency and field of science and engineering: fiscal year 1995 165

23

34

Table Page

C-66. Preliminary Federal obligations for basic research performed at universitiesand colleges, by agency and field of science and engineering:fiscal year 1996 166

C-67. Preliminary Federal obligations for basic research performed at universitiesand colleges, by agency and field of science and engineering:fiscal year 1997 167

C-68. Federal obligations for basic research performed at universities and collegesin psychology and life sciences, by agency and detailed field of science:fiscal year 1995 168

C-69. Federal obligations for basic research performed at universities and collegesin physical and environmental sciences, by agency and detailed field ofscience: fiscal year 1995 169

C-70. Federal obligations for basic research performed at universities and collegesin engineering, by agency and detailed field of engineering: fiscal year 1995 170

C-71. Federal obligations for basic research performed at universities and collegesin mathematics and computer sciences and in social sciences, by agency anddetailed field of science: fiscal year 1995 171

APPLIED RESEARCH PERFORMED AT UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGESAGENCY AND FIELD OF SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

C-72. Federal obligations for applied research performed at universitiesand colleges, by detailed field of science and engineering:fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997 172

C-73. Federal obligations for applied research performed at universitiesand colleges, by agency and field of science and engineering:fiscal year 1995 173

C-74. Preliminary Federal obligations for applied research performed at universitiesand colleges, by agency and field of science and engineering:fiscal year 1996 174

C-75. Preliminary Federal obligations for applied research performed at universitiesand colleges, by agency and field of science and engineering:fiscal year 1997 175

C-76. Federal obligations for applied research performed at universities and collegesin psychology and life sciences, by agency and detailed field of science:fiscal year 1995 176

24

35

Table Page

C-77. Federal obligations for applied research performed at universities and collegesin physical and environmental sciences, by agency and detailed field ofscience: fiscal year 1995 177

C-78. Federal obligations for applied research performed at universities and collegesin engineering, by agency and detailed field of engineering: fiscal year 1995 178

C-79. Federal obligations for applied research performed at universities and collegesin mathematics and computer sciences and in social sciences, by agency anddetailed field of science: fiscal year 1995 179

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTIONRESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

AND R&D PLANT

C-80. Federal obligations for research and development and for R&D plant,by State: fiscal year 1995 180

C-81. Federal obligations for research and development, by State and performer:fiscal year 1995 181

C-81a. Percentage distribution of Federal obligations for research anddevelopment to each performer, by State: fiscal year 1995 182

C-81b. Percentage distribution of Federal obligations for research and developmentto each State, by performer: fiscal year 1995 183

C-82. Federal obligations for research and development,by State and agency: fiscal year 1995 184

C-82a. Percentage distribution of Federal obligations for research and developmentof each agency, by State: fiscal year 1995 185

C-82b. Percentage distribution of Federal obligations for research and developmentof each State, by agency: fiscal year 1995 186

C-83. Federal obligations for research and development, by State, agency,and performer: fiscal year 1995 187

C-84. Federal obligations for R&D plant, by State and category ofperformer supported: fiscal year 1995 201

C-85. Federal obligations for R&D plant, by State and agency: fiscal year 1995 202

FEDERAL INTRAMURAL PERSONNEL COSTS

C-86. Federal obligations for total research and development to intramuralperformers for personnel costs, by agency:fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997 203

25 36

Table Page

C-87. Federal obligations for total basic research to intramural performersfor personnel costs, by agency: fiscal years 1995,1996, and 1997 207

C-88. Federal obligations for total applied research to intramural performersfor personnel costs, by agency: fiscal years 1995,1996, and 1997 209

C-89. Federal obligations for total development to intramural performersfor personnel costs, by agency: fiscal years 1995,1996, and 1997 213

HISTORICAL DATAOUTLAYS

C-90. Federal outlays for research and development and for R&D plant,by agency: fiscal years 1976-86 216

C-90a. Federal outlays for research and development and for R&D plant,by agency: fiscal years 1987-97 220

C-91. Federal outlays for research and development, by agency:fiscal years 1976-86 224

C-91a. Federal outlays for research and development, by agency:fiscal years 1987-97 228

C-92. Federal outlays for R&D plant, by agency: fiscal years 1976-86 232

C-92a. Federal outlays for R&D plant, by agency: fiscal years 1987-97 234

HISTORICAL DATAOBLIGATIONS

C-93. Federal obligations for research and development and for R&D plant,by agency: fiscal years 1976-86 236

C-93a. Federal obligations for research and development and for R&D plant,by agency: fiscal years 1987-97 240

C-94. Federal obligations for research and development, by agency:fiscal years 1976-86 244

C-94a. Federal obligations for research and development, by agency:fiscal years 1987-97 248

C-95. Federal obligations for R&D plant, by agency: fiscal years 1976-86 252

C-95a. Federal obligations for R&D plant, by agency: fiscal years 1987-97 254

C-96. Federal obligations for research, by selected agency: fiscal years 1976-86 256

C-96a. Federal obligations for research, by selected agency: fiscal years 1987-97 260

26

37

Table Page

C-97. Federal obligations for basic research, by selected agency:fiscal years 1976-86 264

C-97a. Federal obligations for basic research, by selected agency:fiscal years 1987-97 267

C-98. Federal obligations for applied research, by selected agency:fiscal years 1976-86 269

C-98a. Federal obligations for applied research, by selected agency:fiscal years 1987-97 273

C-99. Federal obligations for development, by selected agency:fiscal years 1976-86 277

C-99a. Federal obligations for development, by selected agency:fiscal years 1987-97 280

C-100. Federal obligations for research and development, by performer:fiscal years 1976-86 283

C-100a. Federal obligations for research and development, by performer:fiscal years 1987-97

C-101. Federal obligations for research, by performer: fiscal years 1976-86

C-101a. Federal obligations for research, by performer: fiscal years 1987-97

C-102. Federal obligations for basic research, by performer: fiscal years 1976-86

C-102a. Federal obligations for basic research, by performer: fiscal years 1987-97

C-103. Federal obligations for applied research, by performer: fiscal years 1976-86

C-103a. Federal obligations for applied research, by performer: fiscal years 1987-97

C-104. Federal obligations for development, by performer: fiscal years 1976-86

C-104a. Federal obligations for development, by performer: fiscal years 1987-97

C-105. Federal obligations forand engineering: fiscal

C-105a. Federal obligations forand engineering: fiscal

C-106. Federal obligations forand engineering: fiscal

284

285

286

287

288

289

290

291

292

total research, by detailed field of scienceyears 1976-86 293

total research, by detailed field of scienceyears 1987-97 294

basic research, by detailed field of scienceyears 1976-86 295

2738

Table Page

C-106a. Federal obligations for basic research, by detailed field of scienceand engineering: fiscal years 1987-97 296

C-107. Federal obligations for applied research, by detailed field of scienceand engineering: fiscal years 1976-86 297

C-107a. Federal obligations for applied research, by detailed field of scienceand engineering: fiscal years 1987-97 298

C-108. Federal obligations for research and development, by State:fiscal years 1976-86 299

C-108a. Federal obligations for research and development, by State:fiscal years 1987-95 300

C-109. Federal obligations for R&D plant, by State: fiscal years 1976-86 301

C-109a. Federal obligations for R&D plant, by State: fiscal years 1987-95 302

3928

TABLE NOTES

Because of rounding, detail may not add to totals.

Dashes or asterisks appearing in lieu of figures indicate that the amounts are less than 50 thousand dollars orless than 0.5 percent.

The abbreviation "FFRDCs" appearing in statistical tables refers to federally funded research and develop-ment centers.

In tables showing extramural performers, obligations of the U.S. Department of Agriculture to agriculturalexperiment stations are included within obligations to universities and colleges.

Defense agencies within the Department of Defense include the Defense Advanced Research ProjectsAgency, the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, the Defense Information Systems Agency, the DefenseLogistics Agency, the Defense Mapping Agency, the Defense Nuclear Agency, the Joint Staff, the SpecialOperations Command, and the Washington Headquarters Services.

Data for the Washington Headquarters Services' (WHS) submission for Volumes 44 and 45 are derived fromappropriated Department of Defense (DOD) budget baselines and may include a portion of the DefenseResearch and Engineering (DR&E) data. NSF will update all data tables in Volume 46 to reflect WHS datarevisions.

29 40

Table C-1. Federal obligations for research and development, by character of work, and R&D plant:fiscal years 1951-97

[Dollars in thousands]Page 1 of 1

Fiscal Years TotalTotal

research anddevelopment

ResearchDevelopment R&D Plant

Basic Applied

1951 1,851,571 1,521,527 NA NA NA 330,0441952 2,216,848 1,909,665 120,945 NA NA 307,1831953 2,167,456 1,919,543 115,997 NA NA 247,9131954 1,918,046 1,761,840 116,033 NA NA 156,2061955 2,251,894 2,044,593 130,068 NA NA 207,301

1956 3,266,903 2,988,203 206,441 645,506 2,136,256 278,7001957 4,389,237 3,932,001 262,348 662,199 3,007,454 457,2361958 4,906,015 4,569,722 334,543 744,264 3,490,915 336,2931959 7,122,610 6,693,510 465,981 874,272 5,353,257 429,1001960 8,080,015 7,551,746 590,374 1,282,135 5,679,237 528,269

1961 9,607,023 9,058,623 814,513 1,663,431 6,580,679 548,4001962 11,069,059 10,289,947 986,314 2,018,481 7,285,152 779,1121963 13,662,879 12,494,611 1,151,753 2,356,150 8,986,708 1,168,2681964 15,323,870 14,225,354 1,303,000 2,571,452 10,350,902 1,098,5161965 15,745,852 14,614,249 1,435,469 2,811,761 10,367,019 1,131,603

1966 16,178,640 15,320,334 1,579,181 3,081,066 10,660,087 858,3061967 17,149,186 16,529,099 1,845,847 2,785,543 11,897,709 620,0871968 16,525,038 15,921,208 1,840,562 2,940,500 11,140,146 603,8301969 16,309,900 15,640,888 1,944,773 2,700,117 10,995,998 669,0121970 15,863,385 15,338,937 1,925,908 2,974,890 10,438,139 524,448

1971 16,153,756 15,542,512 1,980,141 3,143,030 10,419,341 611,2441972 17,097,951 16,495,895 2,186,937 3,360,759 10,948,199 602,0561973 17,574,486 16,800,153 2,232,006 3,349,423 11,218,724 774,3331974 18,176,457 17,410,128 2,387,681 3,787,559 11,234,888 766,3291975 19,859,548 19,038,818 2,588,427 4,141,281 12,309,110 820,730

1976 21,616,382 20,779,658 2,767,454 4,851,878 13,160,326 836,7241977 24,817,577 23,450,377 3,258,640 5,255,475 14,936,262 1,367,2001978 27,140,849 25,845,137 3,698,604 5,908,154 16,238,379 1,295,7121979 29,620,597 28,145,142 4,192,665 6,342,340 17,610,137 1,475,4551980 31,386,095 29,830,432 4,674,156 6,923,222 18,233,054 1,555,663

1981 34,589,634 33,103,924 5,041,295 7,171,485 20,891,144 1,485,7101982 37,822,363 36,432,589 5,481,605 7,540,580 23,410,404 1,389,7741983 40,009,032 38,711,537 6,260,131 7,993,394 24,458,012 1,297,4951984 44,012,149 42,224,865 7,067,359 7,911,414 27,246,092 1,787,2841985 50,180,369 48,359,565 7,818,682 8,314,739 32,226,144 1,820,804

1986 52,951,181 51,412,364 8,153,076 8,349,123 34,910,165 1,538,8171987 57,099,656 55,253,693 8,942,425 8,998,096 37,313,172 1,845,9631988 58,826,512 56,769,425 9,473,618 9,176,527 38,119,280 2,057,0871989 63,571,605 61,406,484 10,602,011 10,163,520 40,640,953 2,165,1211990 65,831,189 63,559,471 11,285,593 10,336,771 41,937,107 2,271,718

1991 64,147,951 61,295,152 12,170,794 11,797,583 37,326,775 2,852,7991992 68,577,184 65,592,590 12,489,864 12,000,734 41,101,992 2,984,5941993 70,414,697 67,314,025 13,399,121 13,491,376 40,423,528 3,100,6721994 69,426,972 67,255,776 13,552,858 13,887,494 39,815,424 2,171,1961995 71,011,759 68,754,875 13,895,493 14,677,941 40,181,441 2,256,884

1996 (Preliminary) 71,047,756 69,076,929 14,482,056 14,095,711 40,499,162 1,970,8271997 (Preliminary) 70,148,683 68,063,742 14,732,254 14,441,282 38,890,206 2,084,941

KEY: NA = Not applicable (indicates that the data collected for this table were not recorded at that level in that particular fiscalyear)

SOURCE: National Science Foundation/SRS, Survey of Federal Funds for Research and Development: Fiscal Years 1995, 1996,and 1997

31 41

Table C-2. Summary of Federal funds for research and development and for R&D plant:fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997

[In millions of dollars and percentages]Page 1 of 2

Item

1995

Preliminary

1996Percentage

change1995-96

1997Percentage

change1996-97

Total outlays for research and development and for R&D plant $68,410.0 $69,180.0 1.1 $70,118.4 1.4

Research and development 66,374.6 66,876.9 .8 67,691.5 1.2R&D plant 2,035.4 2,303.1 13.2 2,426.9 5.4

Total obligations for research and development and for R&D plant 71,011.8 71,047.8 .1 70,148.7 -1.3

Research and development, total 68,754.9 69,076.9 .5 68,063.7 -1.5

By performers:Intramural' 17,342.7 16,897.0 -2.6 16,403.7 -2.9Industrial firms 30,468.7 31,267.6 2.6 30,712.6 -1.8FFRDCs administered by industrial firms 1,203.9 1,231.3 2.3 1,339.5 8.8Universities and colleges 11,933.0 12,251.2 2.7 12,362.2 .9FFRDCs administered by universities and colleges 3,574.3 3,302.2 -7.6 3,230.6 -2.2

Other nonprofit institutions 2,806.5 2,866.6 2.1 2,883.6 .6FFRDCs administered by nonprofit institutions 831.4 721.2 -13.3 644.1 -10.7

State and local governments 316.5 273.8 -13.5 281.6 2.9Foreign 277.8 266.0 -4.2 205.9 -22.6

Research, total 28,573.4 28,577.8 ' 29,173.5 2.1

By performers:Intramural 1 7,787.8 7,404.3 -4.9 7,696.1 3.9Industrial firms 4,727.9 4,672.8 -1.2 4,799.7 2.7FFRDCs administered by industrial firms 818.0 877.7 7.3 1,005.5 14.6Universities and colleges 10,371.6 10,919.9 5.3 10,823.3 -.9FFRDCs administered by universities and colleges 2,235.6 2,085.7 -6.7 2,131.1 2.2

Other nonprofit institutions 2,056.1 2,101.0 2.2 2,199.9 4.7FFRDCs administered by nonprofit institutions 210.1 183.7 -12.6 191.6 4.3State and local governments 221.4 198.9 -10.2 207.0 4.1Foreign 144.8 133.9 -7.6 119.3 -10.9

By fields of science:Life sciences 11,869.4 12,150.1 2.4 12,299.6 1.2

Psychology 620.8 641.3 3.3 650.2 1.4

Physical sciences 4,281.6 4,322.4 1.0 4,398.2 1.8Environmental sciences 2,947.4 2,924.1 -.8 2,955.1 1.1Mathematics and computer sciences 1,530.9 1,508.3 -1.5 1,545.8 2.5

Engineering 5,740.1 5,508.5 -4.0 5,707.7 3.6

Social sciences 681.5 669.4 -1.8 727.6 8.7Other sciences, n.e.c. 901.8 853.5 -5.4 889.3 4.2

Basic research, total 13,895.5 14,482.1 4.2 14,732.3 1.7

By performers:Intramurall 2,712.9 2,413.9 -11.0 2,667.8 10.5Industrial firms 1,221.2 1,225.7 .4 1,279.1 4.4FFRDCs administered by industrial firms 239.1 339.9 42.2 368.3 8.3Universities and colleges 6,951.3 7,753.6 11.5 7,405.5 -4.5FFRDCs administered by universities and colleges 1,438.3 1,503.5 4.5 -1,519.7 1.1

Other nonprofit institutions 1,134.2 1,062.1 -6.4 1,270.2 19.6FFRDCs administered by nonprofit institutions 75.2 71.6 -4.8 82.9 15.8State and local governments 78.7 70.4 -10.6 92.3 31.2Foreign 44.5 41.3 -7.2 46.5 12.6

By fields of science:Life sciences 6,645.3 6,896.1 3.8 7,043.4 2.1Psychology 275.5 288.6 4.7 294.4 2.0Physical sciences 2,863.0 3,160.7 10.4 3,185.6 .8Environmental sciences 1,473.2 1,512.7 2.7 1,496.0 -1.1Mathematics and computer sciences 554.0 597.8 7.9 604.3 1.1

Engineering 1,468.1 1,392.5 -5.1 1,453.2 4.4Social sciences 209.5 214.5 2.4 226.7 5.7Other sciences, n.e.c. 406.9 419.0 3.0 428.5 2.3

See explanatory information, if any, and SOURCE at end of table.

4232

Table C-2. Summary of Federal funds for research and development and for R&D plant:fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997

[In millions of dollars and percentages]Page 2 of 2

Item

1995

Preliminary

1996Percentage

change1995-96

1997Percentage

change1996-97

Applied research, total $14,677.9 $14,095.7 -4.0 $14,441.3 2.5

By performers:Intramural 1 5,074.9 4,990.4 -1.7 5,028.3 .8Industrial firms 3,506.7 3,447.1 -1.7 3,520.6 2.1FFRDCs administered by industrial firms 578.9 537.7 -7.1 637.2 18.5Universities and colleges 3,420.3 3,166.3 -7.4 3,417.8 7.9FFRDCs administered by universities and colleges 797.3 582.2 -27.0 611.4 5.0

Other nonprofit institutions 921.9 1,038.9 12.7 929.7 -10.5FFRDCs administered by nonprofit institutions 134.9 112.1 -16.9 108.7 -3.0State and local governments 142.7 128.5 -9.9 114.7 -10.8Foreign 100.3 92.6 -7.7 72.8 -21.3

By fields of science:Life sciences 5,224.1 5,254.0 .6 5,256.2 'Psychology