federal funding for health security in fy2016 · in fy2016, $264.6 million is budgeted for dtra’s...
TRANSCRIPT
Federal Funding for Health Security in FY2016
Crystal Boddie, Tara Kirk Sell, and Matthew Watson
This article assesses US government funding in 5 domains critical to strengthening health security: biodefense programs,
radiological and nuclear programs, chemical programs, pandemic influenza and emerging infectious disease programs,
and multiple-hazard and preparedness programs. This year’s article also highlights the emergency funding appropriated
in FY2015 to enable the international and domestic response to the Ebola outbreak in West Africa.
This article continues a series of articles analyzingUS government funding for health security. It exam-
ines proposed funding in the President’s budget for FY2016and provides updated amounts for estimated funds inFY2015 and actual funding for FY2010 through FY2014.
First published in 2004, this series began by catalogingand analyzing funding for civilian biodefense programs inthe federal government. The series, then titled ‘‘Billions forBiodefense,’’1-6 and subsequently ‘‘Federal Funding forBiodefense,’’7-10 was a yearly analysis of agency budgetspresented together as a representation of the federal bio-defense enterprise. In 2012, the UPMC Center for HealthSecurity conducted a complementary analysis that trackedfunding for programs dedicated to consequence manage-ment of radiological and nuclear terrorism.11
Last year, we expanded the focus of the article frombiodefense to health security in order to capture the broadarray of work in preparedness and response going on at thefederal level.12 The Department of Health and HumanServices (HHS) National Health Security Strategy definesnational health security as ‘‘a state in which the Nation andits people are prepared for, protected from, and resilient inthe face of health threats. .’’13(p3),14
This article assesses US government funding in 5 do-mains critical to strengthening health security:
� Biodefense programs: federal programs focused onprevention, preparedness, and response to attacks on
civilians with biological agents and accidental releasesof biological material;
� Radiological and nuclear programs: federal programsfocused on prevention, preparedness, and conse-quence management of radiological and nuclear ter-rorism and large-scale radiological accidents;
� Chemical programs: federal programs focused onprevention, preparedness, and response to large-scaleacute chemical exposures of civilian populations, bothintentional and accidental;
� Pandemic influenza and emerging infectious diseaseprograms: federal programs focused on preparednessand response to large, naturally occurring, and po-tentially destabilizing epidemics; and
� Multiple-hazard and preparedness programs: federalprograms focused on multiple hazards or on buildinginfrastructure and capacity to respond to large-scalehealth threats.
This year’s article also highlights the emergency fundingappropriated in FY2015 to enable the international anddomestic response to the Ebola outbreak in West Africa.
General Methods
This analysis quantifies and documents the amount offederal funding that goes toward health security. It separates
Crystal Boddie, MPH, is an Associate; Tara Kirk Sell, MA, is an Associate; and Matthew Watson is a Senior Analyst; all are at theUPMC Center for Health Security, Baltimore, Maryland.
Health SecurityVolume 13, Number 3, 2015 ª Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.DOI: 10.1089/hs.2015.0017
186
funding for health security into categories based on themajor focus of the program being included. Choices re-garding how an individual program is categorized can bedifficult because of the limited amount of publicly availableinformation describing the programs or identifying pro-gram-level funding amounts.
Efforts were made to obtain funding information down tothe program level in order to be as accurate as possible.However, in some cases, funding for specific programs couldnot be separated from larger line items, and so those lineitems were either included in their entirety or were includedin the ‘‘multiple-hazard and preparedness’’ section of this analysis.
We recognize that this is not a perfect accounting of all ofthe federal work being done in health security. Analysis ofagency budgets and programs included in previous yearsresulted in a number of program additions and a fewchanges in the categorization of programs. As a result,funding totals for different areas of health security andagencies included may be difficult to compare with previ-ous years’ articles. Funding comparisons can be made be-tween fiscal years in this article.
Funding was analyzed from FY2010 through proposedfunding for FY2016, using information from FY2016federal agency budget materials as well as budget docu-ments from prior years. Sources for this analysis includefederal agency ‘‘Budgets in Brief,’’ agency budget justifica-tions, and personal contacts with agency representatives toobtain and track program funding. For the purpose of thisanalysis, programs were broken into categories based onwhether they were focused on biodefense, chemical hazards,radiological/nuclear hazards, pandemic influenza andemerging infectious diseases, or multiple-hazard and gen-eral preparedness. Programs were categorized based on theirmajor focus, as described in budget documents or onprogram websites. Summary tables for program funding ineach category are provided in this article, while more de-tailed tables are available online (see supplementary mate-rial at http://online.liebertpub.com/loi/HS).
Programs supporting prevention, preparedness, and re-sponse, as well as related research efforts, were prioritizedfor inclusion in this analysis of federal health securitybudgets. Research programs were included if they supporteither medical countermeasures (MCM) research and de-velopment (R&D) or threat/risk characterization efforts.Prevention programs were included if they are explicitlyintended to prevent large-scale accidents or terrorist attackswith chemical, biological, or radiological agents. Finally,federal emergency preparedness and response programs thatplay a role in protecting the health of US citizens in large-scale health emergencies were included.
Programs were excluded from this analysis if their focusis on routine provision of health care, on occupationalhealth and safety, or on warfare between nation states (ie,state-level nonproliferation programs). Programs focusedon protecting the warfighter, with no stated civilian appli-cations now or in the future, were also excluded. Specific
inclusion and exclusion criteria and methods used for eachcategory are detailed in each section.
Biodefense Program Funding
This section focuses on funding for federal programs aimedat prevention, preparedness, response, recovery, and miti-gation of deliberate biological threats against the US civilianpopulation and of accidental releases of biological threatagents from a laboratory. In total, the President’s proposedbudget includes $1.37 billion in FY2016 for programs solelydevoted to civilian biodefense. The FY2016 proposed bud-get would represent a decrease of $304.2 million from esti-mated biodefense appropriations in FY2015 (see Table 1).
MethodsPrograms included in this section are solely or primarilyfocused on civilian biodefense as described in budget doc-uments or on program websites. There are many programsin the federal government that address biodefense as aportion of their mission but do not focus specifically onbiodefense. These programs are excluded from this sectionand are instead included in the analysis under the headingof ‘‘multiple-hazard and preparedness’’ programs.
Funding by Federal Agency
Department of DefenseThe FY2016 Department of Defense (DoD) budget forbiodefense programs with civilian applications totals $841million. This represents a reduction in funding of $7.5million (from $848.5 million in FY2015). The DoDbudget includes funding for civilian biodefense under theDefense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), the DefenseAdvanced Projects Agency (DARPA), the defense-wideChemical and Biological Defense Program (CBDP), andthe Defense Health Program at the Uniformed ServicesUniversity of Health Sciences (USUHS).
Overall FindingsIn total, the President’s proposed FY2016 budget in-cludes $13.7 billion for health security–related pro-grams, an estimated increase in funding of $1.2 billionfrom $12.5 billion in FY2015. Most FY2016 healthsecurity funding would go toward programs with mul-tiple-hazard and preparedness goals and missions ($8.1billion, 59%), while 19% of funding ($2.6 billion)would be dedicated to radiological and nuclear pro-grams, 10% ($1.4 billion) to biodefense programs, 9%($1.2 billion) to pandemic influenza and emerging in-fectious disease programs, and 3% ($423 million) tochemical programs (see Figure 1).
BODDIE ET AL.
Volume 13, Number 3, 2015 187
In FY2016, $264.6 million is budgeted for DTRA’sCooperative Biological Engagement (CBE) program,which aims to prevent proliferation of biological weaponsmaterial and expertise, improve laboratory safety, andbuild public health capacity internationally in order tolower the threat of a biological weapons attack in theUS.15 This program is included because its threat reduc-tion and surveillance mission reduces the potential fordomestic bioterrorism.
DARPA Biodefense Research, Development, Testing,and Evaluation (RDT&E) programs with civilian applica-tions total $176.5 million, an increase of $17.4 million overFY2015.16 DARPA programs focus on cutting-edge scienceand technology to protect the warfighter and civilians frombiological threats. Only programs with stated or clear po-tential applications to protect and benefit civilians andhomeland defense have been included in this total.
The Chemical and Biological Defense Program budgetfor civilian-applicable programs includes a number of re-search initiatives ranging from applied research to tech-nology transition. In total, $395.9 million in funding hasbeen budgeted for CBDP biodefense programs with civil-ian applications. This represents a proposed reduction of$33.1 million in civilian biodefense funding from FY2015levels.17 The Biological Defense Directorate at the NavalMedical Research Center has been included under theDefense Health Program RDT&E and would receive aproposed $4.0 million in FY2016.18
Department of Homeland SecurityThe FY2016 Department of Homeland Security (DHS)budget proposes $255.4 million in civilian biodefenseprogram funding in the Office of Health Affairs (OHA)and the Science and Technology Directorate (S&T), adecrease of more than 50% from FY2015 funding levels.This reduction in funding is largely due to the $300 millionin one-time construction funding provided for the newNational Bio and Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF) inFY2015. In OHA, the BioWatch program would befunded at $83.3 million, and the National BiosurveillanceIntegration Center (NBIC) would be funded at $8.0 mil-lion in FY2016. In S&T, bioagent detection, threat as-sessment, and attack resiliency programs and funding forlaboratory facilities, including the National BiodefenseAnalysis and Countermeasures Center (NBACC), NBAF,and the Plum Island Animal Disease Center (PIADC), total$164.1 million.19-21
Department of Health and Human ServicesIn FY2016, the proposed HHS budget specific to civilianbiodefense programs would remain flat at $266.7 million. Allbiodefense programs with FY2016 funding are located inthe FDA’s bioterrorism portfolio, including Food Defense($217.5 million), the Advancing Medical CountermeasuresInitiative (MCMi) ($24.5 million), Physical Security ($7.0million), and operationalizing the Life Sciences and Biodefense
Figure 1. FY2016 Federal Health Security Funding, by Program Focus (in $millions). Color graphics available online at www.liebertonline.com/hs
FEDERAL FUNDING FOR HEALTH SECURITY IN FY2016
188 Health Security
Tab
le1.
Fed
eral
Civ
ilia
nB
iod
efen
seP
rogr
amF
un
din
g(i
n$m
illi
ons)
FY
2014
FY
2015
FY
2016
FY
2010
FY
2011
FY
2012
FY
2013
(act
ual)
(est
imat
ed)
(bud
get)
Dep
artm
ent
ofD
efen
se(D
oD)
Def
ense
Th
reat
Red
uct
ion
Age
ncy
(DT
RA
)C
oop
erat
ive
Bio
logi
cal
En
gage
men
t16
9.1
255.
922
9.5
211.
032
0.0
256.
826
4.6
Def
ense
Ad
van
ced
Pro
ject
sA
gen
cy(D
AR
PA
)R
esea
rch
,D
evel
opm
ent,
Tes
tin
g,an
dE
valu
atio
n(R
DT
E)
Def
ense
Res
earc
hSc
ien
ces
—11
.116
.59.
911
.09.
617
.8B
asic
Op
erat
ion
alM
edic
alSc
ien
ce—
—24
.526
.340
.549
.856
.5B
iom
edic
alT
ech
nol
ogy
—12
.035
.234
.469
.952
.530
.8B
iolo
gica
llyB
ased
Mat
eria
lsan
dD
evic
es—
3.0
6.8
21.1
29.6
47.2
71.4
Ch
emic
alan
dB
iolo
gica
lD
efen
seP
rogr
am(C
BD
P)
(Def
ense
-wid
e)A
pp
lied
Res
earc
hC
hem
ical
Bio
logi
cal
Def
ense
——
——
7.1
2.7
3.0
Tec
hba
seM
edD
efen
se54
.951
.387
.981
.975
.583
.872
.1A
dva
nce
dT
ech
nol
ogy
Dev
elop
men
t(A
TD
)C
hem
ical
Bio
logi
cal
Def
ense
——
——
1.2
——
Tec
hba
seM
edD
efen
se19
6.0
153.
616
6.2
148.
189
.883
.992
.1A
dva
nce
dC
omp
onen
tD
evel
opm
ent
&P
roto
typ
es(A
CD
&P
)C
hem
ical
Bio
logi
cal
Def
ense
——
——
——
18.8
Med
ical
Bio
logi
cal
Def
ense
a95
.512
9.7
121.
211
1.4
132.
789
.181
.9Sy
stem
Dev
elop
men
tan
dD
emon
stra
tion
(SD
D)
Ch
emic
alB
iolo
gica
lD
efen
se—
——
——
—10
.1M
edic
alB
iolo
gica
lD
efen
sea
57.6
75.7
197.
917
3.5
253.
716
9.5
117.
9D
efen
seH
ealt
hP
rogr
amR
DT
&E
(USU
HS)
Nav
alM
edic
alR
esea
rch
Cen
ter:
Bio
logi
cal
Def
ense
Res
earc
hD
irec
tora
te—
——
3.0
4.1
3.6
4.0
Sub
tota
lD
oDC
ivil
ian
Bio
def
ense
Fu
nd
ing
57
3.1
69
2.3
88
5.7
82
0.6
1,0
35
.18
48
.58
41
.0
Dep
artm
ent
ofH
omel
and
Secu
rity
(DH
S)O
ffice
ofH
ealt
hA
ffai
rs(O
HA
)B
ioW
atch
88.1
100.
811
1.8
81.0
85.3
84.7
83.3
Nat
ion
alB
iosu
rvei
llan
ceIn
tegr
atio
nC
ente
r(N
BIC
)13
.57.
012
.812
.310
.08.
08.
0
Scie
nce
&T
ech
nol
ogy
Dir
ecto
rate
(S&
T)
Agr
icu
ltu
reT
hru
stA
rea
24.2
——
——
——
Bio
logi
cal
Cou
nte
rmea
sure
sT
hru
stA
rea
124.
9—
——
——
—C
hem
ical
,B
iolo
gica
l,E
xplo
sive
s(C
BE
),D
efen
seT
hru
stB
ioag
ent
Det
ecti
on—
29.9
11.4
19.8
23.5
26.4
25.0
Cou
nte
rT
erro
rist
Th
rust
Bio
agen
tT
hre
atA
sses
smen
t—
22.3
12.1
20.1
24.1
21.2
23.4
(con
tinu
ed)
Volume 13, Number 3, 2015 189
Table
1.(C
on
tin
ued
)
FY
2014
FY
2015
FY
2016
FY
2010
FY
2011
FY
2012
FY
2013
(act
ual)
(est
imat
ed)
(bud
get)
Dis
aste
rR
esil
ien
ceT
hru
stB
ioag
ent
Att
ack
Res
ilie
ncy
—47
.930
.430
.629
.030
.330
.8L
abor
ator
yF
acil
itie
s(N
BA
CC
,N
BA
F,
Plu
mIs
lan
d)b
,c15
0.2
96.9
127.
511
2.4
97.3
381.
284
.9Su
bto
tal
DH
SC
ivil
ian
Bio
def
ense
Fu
nd
ing
40
0.9
30
4.8
30
6.0
27
6.2
26
9.2
55
1.8
25
5.4
Dep
artm
ent
ofH
ealt
han
dH
um
anSe
rvic
es(H
HS)
Foo
dan
dD
rug
Ad
min
istr
atio
n(F
DA
)B
iote
rror
ism
Foo
dD
efen
se21
7.5
217.
521
7.5
217.
521
7.5
217.
521
7.5
Ad
van
cin
gM
edic
alC
oun
term
easu
res
Init
iati
ve(M
CM
i)—
170.
020
.021
.824
.624
.524
.5P
hys
ical
Secu
rity
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
Lif
eSc
ien
ces
Bio
def
ense
Lab
(op
erat
ion
aliz
ing)
——
——
17.7
17.7
17.7
Hea
lth
Res
ourc
esan
dSe
rvic
esA
dm
inis
trat
ion
(HR
SA)
Cou
nte
rmea
sure
Inju
ryC
omp
ensa
tion
Fu
nd
(sm
allp
ox)
—3.
5—
——
——
Ass
ista
nt
Secr
etar
yfo
rP
rep
ared
nes
san
dR
esp
onse
(ASP
R)
Med
ical
Cou
nte
rmea
sure
sD
isp
ensi
ng
(USP
Sp
ilot
pro
gram
)10
.00
00
5.0
——
Sub
tota
lH
HS
Civ
ilia
nB
iod
efen
seF
un
din
g2
34
.53
98
.02
44
.52
46
.32
71
.82
66
.72
66
.7
Nat
ion
alSc
ien
ceF
oun
dat
ion
(NSF
)H
omel
and
Secu
rity
Act
ivit
ies:
Res
earc
hto
Com
bat
Bio
terr
oris
m15
.015
.015
.015
.016
.715
.015
.0
Tot
alF
eder
alC
ivil
ian
Bio
def
ense
Fu
nd
ing
1,2
23
.51
,41
0.1
1,4
51
.21
,35
8.1
1,5
92
.81
,68
2.0
1,3
78
.1a F
Y20
15to
tal
doe
sn
otin
clu
defu
nd
ing
app
rop
riat
edfo
rE
bola
emer
gen
cyre
spon
se(P
L11
3-23
5,T
itle
X).
bT
otal
sfo
rL
abor
ator
yF
acil
itie
sin
FY
2014
-FY
2016
wer
em
ade
avai
labl
eth
rou
ghp
erso
nal
con
tact
wit
hD
HS
offi
cial
s.c F
un
din
gin
the
amou
nt
of$4
04m
illio
nw
asap
pro
pria
ted
for
con
stru
ctio
nof
NB
AF
inth
eF
Y20
14A
ppr
opri
atio
ns
Act
,bu
tth
ese
fun
ds
wer
en
ever
obli
gate
d.
190 Health Security
Lab ($17.7 million). Other programs at HHS that have bio-defense as a goal, including those at the Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention (CDC), the National Institutes ofHealth (NIH), and the office of the Assistant Secretary forPreparedness and Response (ASPR), are included in the‘‘multiple-hazard and general preparedness’’ section of thisanalysis, because they do not focus solely and specifically onbiodefense.22,23
National Science FoundationThe National Science Foundation’s (NSF) FY2016 budgetrequest remains steady at $15 million for its Research toCombat Bioterrorism program. Funding for this programis allocated from NSF Homeland Security Activities toMicrobial Genomics, Analysis, and Modeling in the BIODirectorate.24
Radiological/Nuclear Program Funding
This section provides funding amounts for federal programsfocused on prevention, preparedness, and consequencemanagement of terrorist and accidental radiological andnuclear incidents. In total, the proposed federal budget forradiological and nuclear programs is $2.6 billion for FY2016.This represents a return to FY2012 funding levels afterfunding for radiological and nuclear–specific programs wassignificantly reduced from FY2013-FY2015 (see Table 2).
MethodsPrograms included in this section are solely or primarilyfocused on radiological/nuclear hazards as described inbudget documents or on program websites. Previous anal-yses by Sell and Franco11 and Schwartz and Choubey,25 aswell as searches of agency budgets, were used to helpidentify programs for inclusion. Programs included in thisanalysis are focused on domestic preparedness and re-sponse, international threat reduction, non-state nonpro-liferation, and counterterrorism activities. Programs thatare solely related to US nuclear weapons stockpile stew-ardship, state-level nonproliferation, and missile defensewere excluded from the analysis.
Funding by Federal Agency
Department of EnergyPrograms included in this analysis from the Departmentof Energy (DOE) are contained in the National NuclearSecurity Administration (NNSA). Under the proposedFY2016 budget, counterterrorism activities, such as NuclearCounterterrorism Incident Response and Counterterrorismand Counterproliferation programs, previously included inthe Weapons Activities appropriation, would be shifted to
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation. Activities in DefenseNuclear Nonproliferation have also been reorganized andnow are represented by a total of 6 programs.26
The Global Material Security program is budgeted toreceive $426.8 million in FY2016. This program workswith partner countries to secure nuclear weapon stockpiles,protect nuclear and radiological materials, and improveabilities to combat trafficking of these materials. The Ma-terial Management and Minimization program has a pro-posed budget of $311.6 million. The goal of this program isto minimize, eliminate, or improve management of nuclearmaterials. The Nonproliferation and Arms Control pro-gram, which would receive $126.7 million in FY2016,works to strengthen nonproliferation and arms control re-gimes to reduce proliferation and the potential for nuclearterrorism. Nonproliferation Construction, which has abudget of $345.0 million, was included in this analysisbased on that program’s work to dispose of weapons-gradeplutonium. Finally, Nuclear Counterterrorism and In-cident Response, which includes activities formerly underthe Counterterrorism and Counterproliferation program,provides emergency response support and rapid responseteams for nuclear or radiological incidents or accidents andhas an FY2016 budget of $234.4 million.
The only program to carry over from the FY2015 bud-get is Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation R&D, at $419.3million. This program works to reduce global nuclear se-curity threats through technology that can detect, identify,and characterize foreign nuclear weapons programs, diver-sion of nuclear materials, and global nuclear detonations.Total funding for these programs is $1.86 billion, a sig-nificant increase from FY2015 funding levels. However, itshould be noted that this year’s analysis includes some ac-tivities that were previously budgeted under Fissile Mate-rials Disposition and were not included under previousfiscal years in this article.26
Department of Homeland SecurityProposed funding for civilian radiological and nuclearprograms under DHS totals $400.7 million for FY2016, anincrease of $55 million over estimated FY2015 funds. TheDHS Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO), whichprotects against radiological and nuclear attacks directedagainst the US or its interests, accounts for the bulk of thebudget in DHS for nuclear/radiological hazards. The pro-posed FY2016 budget would increase funding to DNDOby $52.9 million, for a total of $357.3 million.
Additionally, the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program(REPP), which informs and educates the public about ra-diological emergency preparedness, would be increased by$1.9 million to $39.9 million. The S&T Directorate includesan Explosive and Rad/Nuc Attack Resiliency focus area,which develops planning and funds exercises to prepare forrad/nuc attack scenarios and would be funded at $3.5 millionfor FY2016.19,20
BODDIE ET AL.
Volume 13, Number 3, 2015 191
Tab
le2.
Fed
eral
Civ
ilia
nR
adio
logi
cal/
Nu
clea
rP
rogr
amF
un
din
g(i
n$m
illi
ons)
FY
2014
FY
2015
FY
2016
FY
2010
FY
2011
FY
2012
FY
2013
(act
ual)
(est
imat
e)(b
udge
t)
Dep
artm
ent
ofE
ner
gy(D
OE
)W
eap
ons
Act
ivit
ies
Ap
pro
pri
atio
na
Nu
clea
rC
oun
tert
erro
rism
Inci
den
tR
esp
onse
223.
423
2.5
221.
322
7.1
228.
517
7.9
0C
oun
tert
erro
rism
&C
oun
terp
roli
fera
tion
Pro
gram
s—
——
——
46.1
0N
NSA
Def
ense
Nu
clea
rN
onp
roli
fera
tion
Def
ense
Nu
clea
rN
onp
roli
fera
tion
R&
D31
1.3
355.
434
7.9
00
393.
441
9.3
Non
pro
life
rati
onan
dIn
tern
atio
nal
Secu
rity
1187
.214
7.5
153.
614
3.1
135.
514
1.4
0In
tern
atio
nal
Mat
eria
lP
rote
ctio
n&
Coo
per
atio
n57
2.7
578.
657
5.8
527.
941
5.1
270.
90
Glo
bal
Th
reat
Red
uct
ion
Init
iati
ve33
3.5
444.
750
3.5
462.
944
4.6
325.
80
Glo
bal
Mat
eria
lSe
curi
ty—
——
——
—42
6.8
Mat
eria
lM
anag
emen
tan
dM
inim
izat
ion
——
——
——
311.
6N
onp
roli
fera
tion
and
Arm
sC
ontr
ol—
——
——
—12
6.7
Non
pro
life
rati
onC
onst
ruct
ion
——
——
——
345.
0N
ucl
ear
Cou
nte
rter
rosi
man
dIn
cid
ent
Res
pon
se—
——
——
—23
4.4
Sub
tota
lD
OE
Civ
ilia
nR
ad/N
uc
Fu
nd
ing
2,6
28
.11
,75
8.7
1,8
02
.11
,36
1.0
1,2
23
.71
,35
5.5
1,8
63
.8
Dep
artm
ent
ofH
omel
and
Secu
rity
(DH
S)D
omes
tic
Nu
clea
rD
etec
tion
Offi
ce(D
ND
O)
317.
034
1.7
290.
030
3.0
288.
130
4.4
357.
3F
eder
alE
mer
gen
cyM
anag
emen
tA
gen
cy(F
EM
A)
Rad
iolo
gica
lE
mer
gen
cyP
rep
ared
nes
sP
rogr
am(R
EP
P)b
31.5
36.6
37.1
37.4
42.3
38.0
39.9
Scie
nce
&T
ech
nol
ogy
Dir
ecto
rate
(S&
T)
Exp
losi
ves
&R
ad/N
uc
Att
ack
Res
ilie
ncy
——
—4.
95.
03.
253.
5Su
bto
tal
DH
SC
ivil
ian
Rad
/Nu
cF
un
din
g3
48
.53
78
.33
27
.13
45
.33
35
.43
45
.74
00
.7
Dep
artm
ent
ofD
efen
se(D
oD)
Def
ense
Th
reat
Red
uct
ion
Age
ncy
(DT
RA
)C
oop
erat
ive
Th
reat
Red
uct
ion
(CT
R)
Glo
bal
Nu
clea
rSe
curi
ty11
8.6
164.
515
1.1
39.3
19.4
20.7
20.6
Res
earc
h,
Dev
elop
men
t,T
est
&E
valu
atio
n(R
DT
&E
)W
MD
Def
eat
Tec
hn
olog
ies
(nu
clea
r/ra
dio
logi
cal)
84.4
78.1
91.0
85.8
86.8
86.8
89.0
Cou
nte
rpro
life
rati
onIn
itia
tive
s–
Pro
life
rati
on,
Pre
ven
tion
,an
dD
efea
t84
.793
.178
.474
.979
.872
.374
.5W
MD
Def
eat
Cap
abil
itie
s(n
ucl
ear/
rad
iolo
gica
l)9.
37.
85.
85.
212
.56.
97.
1C
hem
ical
and
Bio
logi
cal
Def
ense
Pro
gram
(CB
DP
)(D
efen
se-w
ide)
Tec
hba
seM
edD
efen
seR
adia
tion
Cou
nte
rmea
sure
s—
—0.
90.
60
0—
Med
ical
Rad
iolo
gica
lD
efen
se9.
66.
42.
40
2.7
0.0
—D
efen
seH
ealt
hP
rogr
amR
DT
&E
(USU
HS)
Rad
iati
onC
oun
term
easu
res
2.5
2.7
2.8
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.8
Arm
y(R
DT
&E
)N
ucl
ear
Arm
sC
ontr
olM
onit
orin
gan
dSe
nso
rN
etw
ork
6.9
7.0
7.2
7.1
——
—Su
bto
tal
DoD
Civ
ilia
nR
ad/N
uc
Fu
nd
ing
31
6.1
35
9.5
33
9.6
21
3.8
20
2.0
18
7.5
19
2.0
(con
tinu
ed)
FEDERAL FUNDING FOR HEALTH SECURITY IN FY2016
192 Health Security
Department of DefenseTotal proposed funding for civilian-applicable radiologicaland nuclear program funding in the DoD would amountto $192.0 million. Although many additional programs inDoD have radiological or nuclear defense in their mission,a large number were excluded from the analysis because oftheir primary focus on warfighters or joint CBRNE defensemission (the programs with a joint CBRNE defense mis-sion are listed instead among the ‘‘multiple-hazard andpreparedness’’ programs).
The Global Nuclear Security program, which works tosecure nuclear weapons and materials, under the DTRACooperative Threat Reduction program would receive es-sentially flat funding at $20.6 million.15 Also in DTRA,programs have been included from Research DevelopmentTesting and Evaluation (RDT&E), which focus on radio-logical/nuclear detection, forensics, effects, and survivabil-ity. These programs have been rolled up under the headingsof WMD Defeat Technologies ($89.0 million), Counter-proliferation Initiatives—Proliferation, Prevention, andDefeat ($74.5 million), and WMD Defeat Capabilities($7.1 million). Overall, these programs show a slight in-crease in funding under the proposed FY2016 budget.27
Expanded spreadsheets detailing the individual programs inDTRA are available online (http://online.liebertpub.com/loi/HS). Finally, the Radiation Countermeasures programin the Defense Health Program is budgeted at $0.8 millionfor FY2016, steady from FY2015.18
Department of StateThe Department of State has a number of nuclear-relatedprograms. However, many were excluded because of theiremphasis on nonproliferation at the nation-state level. Althoughthe mission of several other programs likely fit inclusion criteriafor radiological and nuclear programs, they were difficult toseparate from larger line items that focused on WMD defense.As a result, many programs in the State Department that con-tribute to nuclear defense are included under WMD focusedline items in the ‘‘multiple-hazard and general preparedness’’section of this analysis. However, contributions to the Inter-national Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) were included in theradiological/nuclear analysis because of that agency’s work toprevent nuclear terrorism. The proposed IAEA contribution of$88.0 million is similar to previous years’ amounts.28
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)In the EPA, 2 programs have been selected for inclusion inthis analysis, totaling $21.3 million: Radiation Protection($13.9 million), which provides site characterization forareas of suspected radioactive contamination, and Radia-tion Response Preparedness ($7.4 million), which generatespolicy guidance and procedures for EPA’s emergency re-sponse (including radiological antiterrorism activities).These programs would both see increases in funding in theproposed FY2016 budget.29
Table
2.(C
on
tin
ued
)
FY
2014
FY
2015
FY
2016
FY
2010
FY
2011
FY
2012
FY
2013
(act
ual)
(est
imat
e)(b
udge
t)
Dep
artm
ent
ofSt
ate
Non
pro
life
rati
on,
An
tite
rror
ism
,D
emin
ing,
and
Rel
ated
Pro
gram
sIn
tern
atio
nal
Ato
mic
En
ergy
Age
ncy
(IA
EA
)co
ntr
ibu
tion
65
.07
9.5
85
.99
0.0
88
.08
3.6
88
.0
En
viro
nm
enta
lP
rote
ctio
nA
gen
cy(E
PA
)R
adia
tion
Pro
tect
ion
16.0
15.9
13.8
13.2
13.5
12.6
13.9
Rad
iati
onR
esp
onse
Pre
par
edn
ess
7.1
7.6
6.8
6.5
7.0
6.0
7.4
Sub
tota
lE
PA
Civ
ilia
nR
ad/N
uc
Fu
nd
ing
23
.12
3.5
20
.61
9.7
20
.51
8.6
21
.3
Nu
clea
rR
egu
lato
ryC
omm
issi
on(N
RC
)c
Hom
elan
dSe
curi
ty(N
ucl
ear)
27.1
22.2
26.7
24.3
19.1
18.1
18.8
Eve
nt
Res
pon
se14
.014
.915
.816
.118
.416
.715
.6Su
bto
tal
NR
CC
ivil
ian
Rad
/Nu
cD
efen
seF
un
din
g4
1.1
37
.14
2.5
40
.43
7.5
34
.83
4.4
Tot
alF
eder
alC
ivil
ian
Rad
iolo
gica
l/N
ucl
ear
Fu
nd
ing
3,4
21
.92
,63
6.6
2,6
17
.82
,07
0.2
1,9
07
.12
,02
5.7
2,6
00
.2a T
heN
ucl
ear
Cou
nte
rter
rori
smIn
cid
ent
Res
pon
seP
rogr
aman
dth
eC
oun
tert
erro
rism
and
Cou
nte
rpro
life
rati
onp
rogr
ams
are
pro
pose
dto
betr
ansf
erre
dfr
omth
eW
eapo
ns
Act
ivit
ies
app
rop
riat
ion
toth
eD
efen
seN
ucl
ear
Non
pro
life
rati
onap
pro
pri
atio
nst
arti
ng
inF
Y20
16.
bH
asof
fset
tin
gco
llect
ion
auth
orit
y.c F
Y20
14,
FY
2013
,an
dF
Y20
11p
roje
ctio
non
ly.
BODDIE ET AL.
Volume 13, Number 3, 2015 193
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)Homeland Security and Event Response are the 2 areas offunding from the NRC that are included in this analysis andamount to $34.4 in proposed funding. Funding for HomelandSecurity would be increased by $0.7 million to $18.8 millionin the proposed FY2016 budget. Funding for Event Responsewould decline by $0.9 million, totaling $15.6 million.30
Department of Health and Human ServicesFunding for programs that are solely or primarily devotedto radiological/nuclear hazards was not readily availablethrough the HHS budget materials. Thus, specific rad/nucprogram funding in HHS is not listed in this section ofthe analysis and is instead accounted for in the ‘‘multiple-hazards and general preparedness’’ section.
Chemical Program Funding
The federal government supports a range of programs in-tended to prevent, prepare for, and respond to acute, po-tentially harmful chemical exposures. Such exposures mayresult from either a deliberate release of a chemical weaponor a release of a toxic industrial chemical. In FY2016, thePresident’s budget includes $423.4 million for chemicaldefense programs (see Table 3).
MethodsFederal chemical defense programs were included in this sec-tion if they explicitly support basic research, prevention, andresponse capabilities for large-scale civilian exposures to eitherchemical weapons or toxic industrial chemicals. Research anddevelopment activities undertaken by the DoD were includedbecause of their potential application to future civilian chem-ical defense capabilities. Programs were excluded if they fo-cused primarily on environmental health or did not focus onpreventing or responding to large-scale chemical releases.
Funding by Federal Agency
Department of DefenseThe DoD has the highest proposed chemical defense budgetin FY2016 at $161.1 million. This would represent a 12%decrease from the FY2015 estimate of $183.3 million. Theagencies primarily responsible for executing the chemicaldefense mission in the DoD are DTRA for chemicalweapons destruction ($900,000);31 CBDP for RDT&E ofdiagnostics, detection, therapeutics, and pretreatments($109.5 million);17 and the Department of the Army for theChemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Project ($50.7million).32 Overall, the DoD chemical defense budget islargely dedicated to the research, development, and acqui-sition of antichemical medical countermeasures and per-sonal protective equipment.
Environmental Protection AgencyThe EPA’s budget for chemical defense programs inFY2016 is $123.4 million, which is an 8% increase overthe FY2015 estimate of $113.2 million. EPA’s chemicaldefense portfolio includes the chemical risk review andreduction program ($56.3 million), which assesses andmanages the potential risks from toxic industrial chemicals.The Human Health Risk Assessment ($39.3 million)conducts research on the potential health risks of chemicalexposures. Finally, the EPA’s State and Local Preventionand Preparedness program ($27.8 million) is responsiblefor implementation of the Improving Chemical FacilitySafety and Security Executive Order.33
Department of Homeland SecurityIn DHS, OHA, S&T, and the National Protection andPrograms Directorate (NPPD) have responsibility for theirchemical defense portfolio. In total, $107 million has beenproposed for various DHS chemical defense programs, thevast majority of which ($94.9 million) is being requestedfor the implementation of the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) program, which is intendedto improve security at industrial facilities.19,20
Department of StateThe President’s FY2016 budget would provide the StateDepartment with $20.1 million in support of the Orga-nization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons(OPCW). The OPCW is the international organizationresponsible for implementing the Chemical WeaponsConvention (CWC).28
Department of Health and Human ServicesIn FY2016, the CDC’s chemical laboratories program willprovide $11.8 million to enhance laboratory preparednessfor chemical threats, in line with recent years.34 The NIH’sCounterACT program supports basic research into the pa-thology and treatment of toxic chemical exposures. Becausethe NIH combines the research funding for radiological,nuclear, and chemical countermeasures (see the ‘‘multiple-hazard and preparedness’’ section),35 it is not possible to ac-curately estimate the total budget for CounterACT. However,a newly available budget portal allows an accounting of theextramural funding provided to CounterACT researchers. Iffunding trends continue, in FY2016, NIH will provideroughly $35 million to CounterACT Centers of Excellenceand individual investigators.36
Pandemic Influenza and Emerging
Infectious Disease Program Funding
This section focuses on funding for federal programs aimed atprevention, preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation
FEDERAL FUNDING FOR HEALTH SECURITY IN FY2016
194 Health Security
Tab
le3.
Fed
eral
Civ
ilia
nC
hem
ical
Pro
gram
Fu
nd
ing
(in
$mil
lion
s)
FY
2014
FY
2015
FY
2016
FY
2010
FY
2011
FY
2012
FY
2013
(act
ual)
(est
imat
e)(b
udge
t)
Dep
artm
ent
ofD
efen
se(D
oD)
Arm
yC
hem
ical
Age
nts
and
Mu
nit
ion
sD
estr
uct
ion
,D
efen
seO
per
atio
ns
&M
ain
ten
ance
(O&
M)
Ch
emic
alSt
ockp
ile
Em
erge
ncy
Pre
par
edn
ess
Pro
ject
(CSE
PP
)87
.011
1.2
75.3
53.9
51.2
52.1
50.7
Def
ense
Th
reat
Red
uct
ion
Age
ncy
(DT
RA
)C
hem
ical
Wea
pon
sD
estr
uct
ion
8.0
12.0
9.8
69.0
63.0
15.7
0.9
Ch
emic
alan
dB
iolo
gica
lD
efen
seP
rogr
am(C
BD
P)
(Def
ense
-wid
e)A
pp
lied
Res
earc
hT
ech
base
Non
trad
itio
nal
Age
nts
Def
ense
(ch
emic
al)
——
—15
.223
.732
.229
.3T
ech
base
Med
Def
ense
(ch
emic
al)
32.4
32.0
36.8
19.2
10.3
15.3
16.8
Ad
van
ced
Tec
hn
olog
yD
evel
opm
ent
(AT
D)
Tec
hba
seN
ontr
adit
ion
alA
gen
tsD
efen
se(c
hem
ical
)—
—7.
323
.418
.117
.518
.9T
ech
base
Med
Def
ense
(ch
emic
al)
28.0
25.5
21.2
12.1
4.2
2.0
1.6
Ad
van
ced
Com
pon
ent
Dev
elop
men
t&
Pro
toty
pes
(AC
D&
P)
Ch
emic
alB
iolo
gica
lD
efen
seM
edic
alC
hem
ical
Def
ense
20.5
4.1
7.7
—2.
0—
—Sy
stem
Dev
elop
men
tan
dD
emon
stra
tion
(SD
D)
Ch
emic
alB
iolo
gica
lD
efen
seM
edic
alC
hem
ical
Def
ense
4.1
3.8
2.3
17.4
41.0
48.5
42.9
Sub
tota
lD
oDC
ivil
ian
Ch
emic
alF
un
din
g1
80
.01
88
.61
60
.42
10
.22
13
.51
83
.31
61
.1
En
viro
nm
enta
lP
rote
ctio
nA
gen
cy(E
PA
)T
oxic
Sub
stan
ces
Ch
emic
alR
isk
Rev
iew
and
Red
uct
ion
54.9
59.8
56.5
54.7
56.1
58.1
56.3
Ch
emic
alR
isk
Man
agem
enta
6.0
6.9
6.0
4.9
00
—R
esea
rch
:C
hem
ical
Safe
tyan
dSu
stai
nab
ilit
yH
um
anH
ealt
hR
isk
Ass
essm
ent
42.9
46.1
39.3
36.7
37.8
39.4
39.3
Stat
ean
dL
ocal
Pre
ven
tion
and
Pre
par
edn
ess
En
viro
nm
enta
lP
rogr
am&
Man
agem
ent
(RM
Pch
emic
alri
sk)
13.4
13.1
13.3
12.6
13.8
15.7
27.8
Sub
tota
lE
PA
Civ
ilia
nC
hem
ical
Fu
nd
ing
11
7.2
12
5.9
11
5.1
10
8.9
10
7.7
11
3.2
12
3.4
Dep
artm
ent
ofH
omel
and
Secu
rity
(DH
S)O
ffice
ofH
ealt
hA
ffai
rs(O
HA
)C
hem
ical
Def
ense
Pro
gram
3.9
05.
41.
90.
80.
80.
8Sc
ien
ce&
Tec
hn
olog
yD
irec
tora
te(S
&T
)C
hem
ical
Det
ecti
on—
——
——
3.0
3.0
Ch
emic
alT
hre
atA
sses
smen
t(C
TR
Aan
dC
SAC
)4.
84.
64.
05.
37.
07.
06.
3C
hem
ical
Att
ack
Res
ilie
ncy
(Ch
emic
alF
oren
sics
)4.
84.
72.
63.
53.
52.
02.
0
(con
tinu
ed)
BODDIE ET AL.
Volume 13, Number 3, 2015 195
of pandemic influenza and emerging infectious diseases withdestabilizing potential. In total, the pandemic and emerginginfectious diseases funding budget for FY2016 is $1.2 billion,an increase of almost $200 million from FY2015. The in-crease in funding would result primarily from funding booststo programs in HHS (see Table 4).
MethodsThe scope of the analysis was limited to pandemic influenzapreparedness and response programs, programs focused onnewly emerging infectious diseases with potentially destabi-lizing effects (such as dengue fever), and antimicrobial resis-tance. This analysis used the NIH definition of emergingdisease: ‘‘Emerging diseases include outbreaks of previouslyunknown diseases or known diseases whose incidence in hu-mans has significantly increased in the past two decades.’’37
This analysis did not include programs focused on es-tablished diseases such as HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria(which have their own dedicated funding streams) orchronic diseases. Yearly funding for emerging infectiousdiseases, including Ebola research, is captured in this sec-tion of the analysis. However, special one-time funding forEbola response has been separated into its own analysis.
Funding by Federal Agency
Department of Health and Human ServicesHHS funds the majority of programs dedicated to pandemicinfluenza and emerging infectious diseases. In FY2016,proposed HHS funding totals $1.14 billion, a significantincrease from estimated FY2015 funding of $959.7 million.
At CDC, the Core Infectious Disease program in theNational Center for Emerging and Zoonotic InfectiousDiseases is budgeted at $275.6 million for FY2016, anincrease in funding of $25.9 million from FY2015. Thisprogram includes efforts to protect against antimicrobialresistance, high-consequence pathogens, vector-borne dis-eases, and other threats. The CDC Global Public HealthProtection program, which includes the Global DiseaseDetection and Emergency Response program and theGlobal Health Security Agenda, would also see an increasein funding of $21.6 million to $76.7 million. Most otherprograms in CDC, such as Influenza Planning and Response($187.6 million), Advanced Molecular Detection and Re-sponse to Infectious Disease Outbreaks ($30 million), andQuarantine ($31.6 million), would remain at steady fundingunder the President’s proposed FY2016 budget.
Notably this year, the NIH has a new website that pro-vides detailed information on estimates of funding for var-ious Research Condition and Disease Categories (RCDC),which breaks down funding categorically, including forbiodefense and influenza. Because of this high level oftransparency by NIH, this year’s article now includes
Table
3.(C
on
tin
ued
)
FY
2014
FY
2015
FY
2016
FY
2010
FY
2011
FY
2012
FY
2013
(act
ual)
(est
imat
e)(b
udge
t)
Nat
ion
alP
rote
ctio
n&
Pro
gram
sD
irec
tora
te(N
PP
D)
Infr
astr
uct
ure
Secu
rity
Com
pli
ance
103.
495
.993
.371
.781
.087
.094
.9Su
bto
tal
DH
SC
ivil
ian
Ch
emic
alF
un
din
g1
16
.91
05
.21
05
.38
2.4
92
.39
9.8
10
7.0
Dep
artm
ent
ofSt
ate
Org
aniz
atio
nfo
rth
eP
roh
ibit
ion
ofC
hem
ical
Wea
pon
s(O
PC
W)
24
.02
5.5
19
.62
0.1
20
.11
9.4
20
.1
Dep
artm
ent
ofH
ealt
han
dH
um
anSe
rvic
es(H
HS)
Cen
ters
for
Dis
ease
Con
trol
and
Pre
ven
tion
(CD
C)
Ch
emic
alL
abor
ator
ies
(LR
N-C
)b—
——
10.3
10.3
11.8
11.8
Nat
ion
alIn
stit
ute
sof
Hea
lth
(NIH
)C
oun
terA
CT
50.0
49.5
——
——
—Su
bto
tal
HH
SC
ivil
ian
Ch
emic
alF
un
din
g5
0.0
49
.50
.01
0.3
10
.31
1.8
11
.8
Tot
alF
eder
alC
ivil
ian
Ch
emic
alF
un
din
g4
88
.14
94
.74
00
.44
31
.94
43
.94
27
.54
23
.4a T
his
pro
gram
was
com
bin
edw
ith
Ch
emic
alR
isk
Rev
iew
and
Red
uct
ion
asof
FY
2015
.bF
un
din
gfo
rth
isp
rogr
amw
assu
btra
cted
from
the
CD
CSt
ate
and
Loc
alP
rep
ared
nes
san
dR
esp
onse
Cap
abil
ity
inth
eM
ult
i-H
azar
dan
dP
rep
ared
nes
sSe
ctio
n.
FEDERAL FUNDING FOR HEALTH SECURITY IN FY2016
196 Health Security
Tab
le4.
Fed
eral
Civ
ilia
nP
and
emic
Infl
uen
zaan
dE
mer
gin
gIn
fect
iou
sD
isea
ses
Pro
gram
Fu
nd
ing
(in
$mil
lion
s)
FY
2014
FY
2015
FY
2016
FY
2010
FY
2011
FY
2012
FY
2013
(act
ual)
(est
imat
ed)
(bud
get)
Dep
artm
ent
ofH
ealt
han
dH
um
anSe
rvic
es(H
HS)
Cen
ters
for
Dis
ease
Con
trol
and
Pre
ven
tion
(CD
C)
Imm
un
izat
ion
and
Res
pir
ator
yD
isea
ses
Infl
uen
zaP
lan
nin
gan
dR
esp
onse
159.
715
9.7
172.
616
6.1
172.
618
7.6
187.
6E
mer
gin
gan
dZ
oon
otic
Infe
ctio
us
Dis
ease
sC
ore
Infe
ctio
us
Dis
ease
pro
gram
213.
718
6.2
225.
721
7.0
218.
624
9.7
275.
6A
dva
nce
dM
olec
ula
rD
etec
tion
and
Res
pon
seto
Infe
ctio
us
Dis
ease
Ou
tbre
aks
——
——
29.9
30.0
30.0
Qu
aran
tin
e26
.526
.033
.031
.331
.631
.631
.6G
loba
lH
ealt
hG
loba
lD
isea
seD
etec
tion
and
Em
erge
ncy
Res
pon
se(G
loba
lH
ealt
hSe
curi
tyIn
itia
tive
)a44
.241
.945
.444
.8—
——
Glo
bal
Pu
blic
Hea
lth
Pro
tect
ion
——
——
62.6
55.1
76.7
Nat
ion
alIn
stit
ute
sof
Hea
lth
(NIH
)In
flu
enza
Res
earc
h(e
xclu
din
gA
RR
Afu
nd
ing)
308.
027
2.0
251.
030
4.0
262.
026
3.0
284.
0F
ood
and
Dru
gA
dm
inis
trat
ion
(FD
A)
Pan
dem
icIn
flu
enza
46.7
43.6
30.0
32.1
38.3
38.3
40.0
An
tim
icro
bial
Res
ista
nce
30.2
27.7
44.1
25.9
26.8
32.5
47.3
Offi
ceof
the
Secr
etar
y(O
S)P
and
emic
Infl
uen
zaP
rep
ared
nes
sA
ctiv
itie
s27
6.0
65.0
00
——
—A
ssis
tan
tSe
cret
ary
for
Pre
par
edn
ess
and
Res
pon
se(A
SPR
)P
and
emic
Infl
uen
za—
——
—11
0.6
67.9
166.
0O
ffice
ofG
lob
alA
ffai
rs(O
GA
)In
tern
atio
nal
Pan
dem
icIn
flu
enza
Act
ivit
ies
——
——
4.0
4.0
4.0
Sub
tota
lH
HS
Civ
ilia
nP
and
emic
Flu
and
EID
Fu
nd
ing
1,1
05
.08
22
.18
01
.88
21
.39
57
.09
59
.71
,14
2.8
US
Age
ncy
for
Inte
rnat
ion
alD
evel
opm
ent
(USA
ID)
Glo
bal
Hea
lth
Secu
rity
(for
mer
lyP
and
emic
Infl
uen
zaan
dO
ther
Em
ergi
ng
Th
reat
s[P
IOE
T])
15
6.0
47
.95
8.0
54
.97
2.1
50
.05
0.0
Dep
artm
ent
ofD
efen
se(D
oD)
Def
ense
Hea
lth
Pro
gram
(RD
T&
E)
Ap
pli
edB
iom
edic
alT
ech
nol
ogy
Com
bati
ng
An
tibi
otic
Res
ista
nt
Bac
teri
a(G
HSA
)—
——
——
—3
.2
Tot
alF
eder
alC
ivil
ian
Pan
dem
icIn
flu
enza
and
Em
ergi
ng
Infe
ctio
us
Dis
ease
sF
un
din
g1
,26
1.0
87
0.0
85
9.8
87
6.2
1,0
29
.11
,00
9.7
1,1
96
.0
a Star
tin
gin
FY
2014
,th
eG
loba
lD
isea
seD
etec
tion
and
Em
erge
ncy
Res
pon
sep
rogr
aman
dth
eG
HSI
are
now
loca
ted
un
der
the
Glo
bal
Pu
blic
Hea
lth
Pro
tect
ion
pro
gram
.
Volume 13, Number 3, 2015 197
funding for influenza research ($284.0 million), whichwould be an increase of $21 million above FY2015 levels.38
The FY2016 FDA budget includes $40 million infunding for pandemic influenza (an increase of $1.7 mil-lion) and $47.3 million for antimicrobial resistance (anincrease of $14.8 million).23
The FY2016 proposed budget for Pandemic Influenzafunding in ASPR would be $166.0 million, an increase ofnearly $100 million over FY2015 estimated funding.34
The ASPR FY2016 budget for pandemic influenza includesboth ‘‘no year’’ and ‘‘annual’’ program funding. Annualpandemic programs at ASPR are: Diagnostics AdvancedDevelopment ($10 million), Fill-Finish ManufacturingNetwork ($13 million), and Office of Policy and PlanningInternational Pandemic Influenza Activities ($3 million).‘‘No year’’ ASPR pandemic programs are: Vaccine Stock-piling by BARDA ($20 million), Universal InfluenzaVaccine Candidates ($75 million), and Advanced Devel-opment of Influenza Immunotherapeutics (eg, monoclonalantibodies) ($45 million).39
Finally, starting in FY2014, HHS added a program onInternational Pandemic Influenza Activities in the Officeof Global Affairs, which is budgeted at $4.0 million forFY2016. This program supports ‘‘global health diplomacyin international pandemic preparedness and response.’’39
US Agency for International DevelopmentThe proposed FY2016 US Agency for International Devel-opment (USAID) budget includes the Pandemic Influenzaand Other Emerging Threats (PIOET) program, which em-phasizes early identification of and response to dangerous in-fectious disease outbreaks in animals before they can becomesignificant threats to human health. Funding for this programwould remain steady in the FY2016 budget at $50.0 million.28
Department of DefenseThe only DoD program included in the pandemic influ-enza and emerging infectious disease section is CombatingAntibiotic Resistant Bacteria in the Defense Health Pro-gram. This program would be funded at $3.2 million in thePresident’s proposed FY2016 budget.18
Multiple-Hazard and Preparedness
Program Funding
This section is focused on federal programs aimed at pre-vention, preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigationof multiple hazards and programs that aim to build pre-paredness and response systems for large-scale healthevents. Total proposed funding for multiple-hazard andpreparedness programs would amount to $8.1 billion inFY2016. Compared with estimated funding for FY2015,proposed funding for multiple-hazard and preparednessprograms would be increased by $750 million. This in-
crease is largely because of proposed funding increases inHHS. Other agencies would see slight increases or remainrelatively flat (see Table 5).
MethodsPrograms included in this section have a multiple-hazardfocus, have general preparedness and response goals, and/orare targeted at building infrastructure and capacity to re-spond to large-scale domestic health threats of many typesand causes. These programs protect against one or morehazards beyond biological, radiological/nuclear, chemical,or pandemic and emerging infectious disease hazards alone.Examples of programs that are included in this section areprograms aimed at a combination of CBRN threats orWMD preparedness and response; programs aimed atbuilding public health, medical, or emergency managementcapacity to respond to large-scale health emergencies; andbasic infectious disease research programs, the results ofwhich may have implications for a multitude of emerginginfectious diseases.
Funding by Federal Agency
Department of Health and Human ServicesTotal HHS funding budgeted for multiple-hazard andpreparedness programs in FY2016 is $ 4.96 billion. Thelargest portion of multiple-hazard and preparedness fund-ing in HHS is provided for Biodefense and Emerging In-fectious Disease Research ($1.85 billion) in the NIH.35
This program was included in the multiple-hazard sectionbecause of its dual focus on biodefense and emerging in-fections. In this year’s analysis, NIH funding informationwas available for both intramural and extramural fundingfor this program. In past years, only extramural fundingtotals have been available. This year’s analysis provides amore accurate picture of the funding totals for this program($1.46 billion for extramural research, and $492 million forintramural research and other costs for the program).38
CDC programs also represent a large proportion of HHSfunding in this section. Programs include State and LocalPreparedness and Response Capability ($643.6 million),which includes the Public Health Emergency Preparedness(PHEP) grants; the CDC Preparedness and ResponseCapability ($167.2 million); and the Strategic NationalStockpile ($571.0 million).35 After remaining at $661.0million for FY2014 and FY2015, the State and LocalPreparedness and Response Capability would be reducedby $17.4 million in FY2016. From the program’s peakfunding level in FY2002 to the estimated level for FY2015,this program has seen nearly a 30% reduction in funding, atrend that would continue into FY2016.7,34 The CDCPreparedness and Response Capability, which includes theBioSense program, would receive an increase of $10 mil-lion, and the SNS program, which stockpiles MCMs
FEDERAL FUNDING FOR HEALTH SECURITY IN FY2016
198 Health Security
Tab
le5.
Fed
eral
Civ
ilia
nM
ult
iple
-Haz
ard
and
Pre
par
edn
ess
Pro
gram
Fu
nd
ing
(in
$mil
lion
s)
FY
2014
FY
2015
FY
2016
FY
2010
FY
2011
FY
2012
FY
2013
(act
ual)
(est
imat
ed)
(bud
get)
Dep
artm
ent
ofH
ealt
han
dH
um
anSe
rvic
es(H
HS)
Cen
ters
for
Dis
ease
Con
trol
and
Pre
ven
tion
(CD
C)
Stat
ean
dL
ocal
Pre
par
edn
ess
and
Res
pon
seC
apab
ilit
y(i
ncl
ud
ing
PH
EP
and
CR
I)a
761.
066
4.0
657.
461
9.9
661.
066
1.0
643.
6C
DC
Pre
par
edn
ess
and
Res
pon
seC
apab
ilit
y(i
ncl
ud
ing
Bio
Sen
se)
166.
016
0.0
138.
315
5.5
157.
215
7.2
167.
2St
rate
gic
Nat
ion
alSt
ockp
ile
(SN
S)59
6.0
591.
053
3.8
493.
254
9.3
534.
357
1.0
Nat
ion
alIn
stit
ute
sof
Hea
lth
(NIH
)B
iode
fen
sean
dE
mer
gin
gIn
fect
iou
sD
isea
ses
Res
earc
h(N
IAID
)(e
xtra
mur
al)
1,31
6.2
1,30
5.5
1,30
7.8
1,23
3.3
1,26
8.5
1,26
1.3
1,35
5.8
Bio
defe
nse
and
Em
ergi
ng
Infe
ctio
us
Dis
ease
sR
esea
rch
(NIA
ID)
(in
tram
ural
and
oth
erco
sts)
b—
497.
548
3.2
458.
747
7.5
483.
749
2.2
Nu
clea
r/R
adio
logi
c/C
hem
ical
Cou
nte
rmea
sure
sR
esea
rch
96.7
95.3
95.3
90.9
92.1
92.1
93.4
Offi
ceof
the
Secr
etar
y(O
S)C
omm
issi
oned
Cor
ps
Rea
din
ess
and
Res
pon
se14
.814
.8—
——
——
Ass
ista
nt
Secr
etar
yfo
rP
rep
ared
nes
san
dR
esp
onse
(ASP
R)
Med
ical
Res
erve
Cor
ps
13.0
12.0
11.2
11.0
9.0
9.0
6.0
Ope
rati
ons
37.0
44.0
33.0
31.0
31.3
31.3
30.9
Bio
med
ical
Ad
van
ced
Res
earc
han
dD
evel
opm
ent
Au
thor
ity
(BA
RD
A)c
320.
037
8.0
415.
041
5.0
413.
541
5.0
521.
7P
roje
ctB
iosh
ield
——
——
254.
125
5.0
626.
4P
rep
ared
nes
san
dE
mer
gen
cyO
per
atio
ns
30.0
30.0
30.0
28.0
28.0
24.8
24.7
Nat
ion
alD
isas
ter
Med
ical
Syst
em(N
DM
S)52
.052
.053
.050
.050
.150
.149
.9H
osp
ital
Pre
par
edn
ess
(HP
P)
Gra
nts
(in
clu
din
gE
SAR
-VH
P)
417.
037
5.0
375.
035
8.0
255.
125
4.6
254.
6P
olic
yan
dP
lan
nin
g19
.019
.016
.015
.014
.914
.914
.9O
ther
Pu
bli
cH
ealt
han
dSo
cial
Serv
ices
Em
erge
ncy
Fu
nd
(PH
SSE
F)
Pu
blic
Hea
lth
Em
erge
ncy
Res
pon
seIn
itia
tive
d—
——
——
—11
0.0
Sub
tota
lH
HS
Civ
ilia
nM
ult
iple
-Haz
ard
/Pre
par
edn
ess
Fu
ndi
ng
3,8
38.
74
,23
8.1
4,1
49.
03
,95
9.4
4,2
61.6
4,2
44
.34
,96
2.3
Dep
artm
ent
ofH
omel
and
Secu
rity
(DH
S)O
ffice
ofH
ealt
hA
ffai
rs(O
HA
)P
lan
nin
gan
dC
oord
inat
ion
3.7
2.3
5.9
5.1
5.0
5.0
5.0
Med
ical
Cou
nte
rmea
sure
s—
—0
0.8
1.0
0.5
—F
eder
alE
mer
gen
cyM
anag
emen
tA
gen
cy(F
EM
A)
Pre
par
edn
ess
and
Pro
tect
ion
——
166.
017
1.1
169.
818
5.0
190.
9R
esp
onse
——
191.
817
1.5
178.
116
7.4
168.
5R
ecov
ery
——
55.3
52.8
57.0
56.0
51.5
Mit
igat
ion
——
30.7
28.5
27.8
25.8
25.8
Stat
ean
dL
ocal
Pro
gram
s2,
114.
91,
691.
61,
602.
91,
731.
71,
500.
01,
205.
51,
211.
4Sc
ien
ce&
Tec
hn
olog
yD
irec
tora
te(S
&T
)C
oun
tert
erro
rist
Th
rust
Inte
grat
edT
erro
rism
Ris
kA
sses
smen
t3.
03.
02.
52.
53.
83.
82.
0In
tegr
ated
Con
sort
ium
ofL
abor
ator
yN
etw
orks
4.8
4.7
2.6
3.5
——
—St
anda
rds
Thr
ust
(in
clu
din
gch
emic
alan
dbi
olog
ical
syst
ems
stan
dar
ds)
——
15.9
8.2
8.2
8.2
7.4
Cu
stom
san
dB
ord
erP
rote
ctio
n(C
BP
)In
tern
atio
nal
Car
goSc
reen
ing
145.
510
3.9
74.6
70.4
67.9
69.2
69.9
Sub
tota
lD
HS
Civ
ilia
nM
ult
iple
-Haz
ard
/Pre
par
edn
ess
Fu
nd
ing
2,2
71.
91
,80
5.5
2,1
48.
22
,24
6.1
2,0
18.6
1,7
26
.41
,73
2.4
(con
tinu
ed)
Volume 13, Number 3, 2015 199
Table
5.(C
on
tin
ued
)
FY
2014
FY
2015
FY
2016
FY
2010
FY
2011
FY
2012
FY
2013
(act
ual)
(est
imat
ed)
(bud
get)
Dep
artm
ent
ofD
efen
se(D
oD)
US
Arm
yN
atio
nal
Gu
ard
CB
RN
EE
nte
rpri
seW
MD
Civ
ilSu
ppor
tT
eam
s32
.934
.816
.511
.512
.617
.117
.3O
ther
CB
RN
EC
apab
ilit
ies
—11
.621
.611
0.1
137.
715
2.3
150.
4U
SN
avy
WM
DD
etec
tion
(fiss
ile
mat
eria
lsan
dw
eap
ons)
9.6
24.4
8.5
3.7
2.0
——
Stop
pag
eof
larg
esu
rfac
eve
ssel
sat
sea
(su
spec
ted
ofca
rryi
ng
WM
D)
6.3
14.3
4.8
00
——
Def
ense
Th
reat
Red
uct
ion
Age
ncy
(DT
RA
)C
oop
erat
ive
Th
reat
Red
uct
ion
Pro
gram
(WM
Dco
mp
onen
ts)
For
mer
Sovi
etU
nio
nT
hrea
tR
edu
ctio
n42
3.6
——
——
——
Pro
lifer
atio
nP
reve
nti
on29
.136
.963
.187
.315
2.4
40.7
38.9
Thr
eat
Red
uct
ion
En
gage
men
t5.
05.
02.
52.
80.
52.
42.
8O
per
atio
ns
and
Mai
nte
nan
ceN
onp
roli
fera
tion
Act
ivit
ies
62.8
58.8
58.8
57.4
53.0
58.8
66.7
US
Stra
tegi
cC
omm
and
Cen
ter
for
Com
bati
ng
WM
D28
.033
.512
.011
.09.
111
.311
.2R
esea
rch
,D
evel
opm
ent,
Tes
tin
g,an
dE
valu
atio
n(R
DT
E)
Fu
nd
amen
tal
Res
earc
hfo
rC
omba
tin
gW
MD
40.0
46.1
47.7
40.8
44.8
37.8
38.4
WM
DD
efea
tT
echn
olog
ies
65.9
58.4
58.9
35.3
33.4
39.9
41.1
Cou
nte
rpro
lifer
atio
nIn
itia
tive
s—P
roli
fera
tion
,P
reve
nti
on,
and
Def
eat
41.5
41.6
49.6
29.9
47.7
53.9
68.3
Def
ense
Ad
van
ced
Res
earc
hP
roje
cts
Age
ncy
(DA
RP
A)
Res
earc
h,
Dev
elop
men
t,T
esti
ng,
and
Eva
luat
ion
(RD
TE
)B
iolo
gica
lW
arfa
reD
efen
seP
rogr
am(C
BR
focu
s)41
.335
.330
.815
.125
.643
.829
.3C
hem
ical
and
Bio
logi
cal
Def
ense
Pro
gram
(CB
DP
)(D
efen
se-w
ide)
Bas
icR
esea
rch
(lif
ean
dp
hys
ical
scie
nce
sch
em/b
iore
sear
ch)
63.8
48.7
46.6
45.6
50.7
48.3
46.3
Ap
pli
edR
esea
rch
Ch
emic
alB
iolo
gica
lD
efen
se11
0.9
85.8
97.5
29.2
27.1
43.5
43.0
Tec
hbas
eN
ontr
adit
ion
alA
gen
tD
efen
se—
—0
24.2
23.6
25.0
25.1
Ad
van
ced
Tec
hn
olog
yD
evel
opm
ent
(AT
D)
Ch
emic
alB
iolo
gica
lD
efen
se18
.58.
411
.714
.715
.515
.014
.7T
echb
ase
Non
trad
itio
nal
Age
nt
Def
ense
——
—0.
71.
31.
83.
1A
dva
nce
dC
omp
onen
tD
evel
opm
ent
&P
roto
typ
es(A
CD
&P
)C
hem
ical
Bio
logi
cal
Def
ense
5.7
10.5
16.2
7.4
1.2
——
Syst
emD
evel
opm
ent
and
Dem
onst
rati
on(S
DD
)C
hem
ical
Bio
logi
cal
Def
ense
2.9
09.
05.
214
.316
.517
.1O
per
atio
nal
Syst
ems
Dev
elop
men
t(O
PSY
SD
EV
)C
hem
ical
Bio
logi
cal
Def
ense
——
——
1.8
2.0
1.9
Sub
tota
lD
oDC
ivil
ian
Mu
ltip
le-H
azar
d/P
rep
ared
nes
sF
un
din
g9
87.
85
54.
15
55.
85
31
.96
54
.36
10
.16
15.
6
Dep
artm
ent
ofSt
ate
Arm
sC
ontr
ol,
Ver
ifica
tion
,an
dC
omp
lian
ceO
ffice
ofC
hem
ical
and
Bio
logi
cal
Wea
pon
sA
ffai
rs4.
02.
32.
12.
02.
32.
22.
2
(con
tinu
ed)
200 Health Security
Table
5.(C
on
tin
ued
)
FY
2014
FY
2015
FY
2016
FY
2010
FY
2011
FY
2012
FY
2013
(act
ual)
(est
imat
ed)
(bud
get)
Inte
rnat
ion
alSe
curi
tyan
dN
onp
roli
fera
tion
49.3
46.5
47.7
45.9
44.6
42.5
45.2
Non
pro
life
rati
on,
An
tite
rror
ism
,D
emin
ing,
and
Rel
ated
Pro
gram
sE
xpor
tC
ontr
olan
dR
elat
edB
ord
erSe
curi
tyA
ssis
tan
ce54
.060
.061
.855
.664
.057
.058
.7G
loba
lT
hrea
tR
edu
ctio
n(G
TR
)70
.070
.069
.064
.577
.465
.164
.3W
eapo
ns
ofM
ass
Des
tru
ctio
nT
erro
rism
2.0
2.0
6.0
5.5
5.0
4.8
6.2
Sub
tota
lD
epar
tmen
tof
Stat
eC
ivil
ian
Mu
ltip
le-H
azar
d/P
rep
ared
nes
sF
un
din
g2
54.
32
34.
12
16.
62
00
.52
23
.31
96
.62
01.
6
En
viro
nm
enta
lP
rote
ctio
nA
gen
cy(E
PA
)H
omel
and
Secu
rity
Gra
nts
toSt
ates
(for
mer
lyW
ater
Safe
tyG
ran
ts)
2.9
0—
——
——
Com
mu
nic
atio
nan
dIn
form
atio
n6.
94.
23.
44.
14.
13.
84.
1C
riti
cal
Infr
astr
uct
ure
Pro
tect
ion
31.6
20.9
12.6
11.3
10.9
11.3
12.9
Pre
par
edn
ess,
Res
pon
se,
and
Rec
over
y98
.787
.167
.967
.463
.461
.558
.3P
rote
ctio
nof
EP
AP
erso
nn
elan
dIn
fras
tru
ctu
re16
.216
.012
.314
.410
.613
.814
.7Su
per
fun
dE
mer
gen
cyR
esp
onse
and
Rem
oval
202.
324
2.4
189.
618
3.3
190.
318
1.3
190.
7E
mer
gen
cyP
rep
ared
nes
s9.
610
.59.
28.
87.
77.
67.
8Su
bto
tal
EP
AC
ivil
ian
Mu
ltip
le-H
azar
d/P
rep
ared
nes
sF
un
din
g3
68.
23
81.
22
95.
02
89
.32
87
.02
79
.32
88.
5
Dep
artm
ent
ofJu
stic
e(D
oJ)
Nat
ion
alSe
curi
tyD
ivis
ion
88
.08
8.0
87
.08
4.0
92
.09
3.0
96
.6N
atio
nal
Scie
nce
Fou
nd
atio
n(N
SF)
Hom
elan
dSe
curi
tyA
ctiv
itie
sP
rote
ctin
gC
riti
cal
Infr
astr
uct
ure
and
Key
Ass
ets
Cou
nte
rter
rori
sm27
.027
.027
.027
.027
.027
.027
.0E
mer
gen
cyP
lan
nin
gan
dR
esp
onse
56.6
50.9
51.8
51.3
51.3
50.3
50.3
Sub
tota
lN
SFC
ivil
ian
Mu
ltip
le-H
azar
d/P
rep
ared
nes
sF
un
din
g8
3.6
77
.97
8.8
78
.37
8.3
77
.37
7.3
Dep
artm
ent
ofC
omm
erce
(DoC
)B
ure
auof
Ind
ust
ryan
dSe
curi
ty—
Exp
ort
Ad
min
istr
atio
n5
8.1
66
.05
6.6
52
.35
5.6
56
.25
8.8
US
Dep
artm
ent
ofA
gric
ult
ure
(USD
A)
An
imal
and
Pla
nt
Hea
lth
Insp
ecti
onSe
rvic
e(A
PH
IS)
Em
erge
ncy
Man
agem
ent
22.0
22.0
18.0
17.0
17.0
17.0
17.0
Foo
dSa
fety
and
Insp
ecti
onSe
rvic
e(F
SIS)
Pu
blic
Hea
lth
Dat
aC
omm
un
icat
ion
Infr
astr
uctu
reSy
stem
28.0
26.0
35.0
35.0
35.0
35.0
35.0
Offi
ceof
Hom
elan
dSe
curi
tyan
dE
mer
gen
cyC
oord
inat
ion
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Sub
tota
lU
SDA
Civ
ilia
nM
ult
iple
-Haz
ard
/Pre
par
edn
ess
Fu
ndi
ng
52
.04
9.0
54
.05
3.0
54
.05
4.0
54
.0
Dep
artm
ent
ofV
eter
ans
Aff
airs
(VA
)E
mer
gin
gP
ath
ogen
s/B
iote
rror
ism
1.0
1.3
0.7
0.5
1.0
1.0
1.0
Tot
alF
eder
alC
ivil
ian
Mu
ltip
le-H
azar
dan
dG
ener
alP
rep
ared
nes
sF
un
din
g8
,00
3.5
7,4
95.
27
,64
1.7
7,4
95.
47
,725
.77
,33
8.2
8,0
88.
1
a $10.
3m
illi
onh
asbe
ensu
btra
cted
from
this
tota
lfo
rL
RN
-Cfo
rF
Y20
13-F
Y20
15.
bD
ata
for
this
lin
ear
eob
tain
edfr
omth
eN
IHR
esea
rch
Con
dit
ion
and
Dis
ease
Cat
egor
ies
(RC
DC
).T
oca
lcu
late
intr
amu
ral
and
oth
erco
sts,
extr
amu
ral
tota
lsh
ave
been
subt
ract
ed.
Dat
aar
eu
nav
aila
ble
for
FY
2010
.c F
orB
AR
DA
inF
Y20
15,
$58
mil
lion
has
been
subt
ract
edan
din
clu
ded
inst
ead
inth
eE
bola
emer
gen
cyfu
nd
ing
acco
un
tin
Tab
le6.
dT
his
pro
pos
edfu
nd
isin
ten
ded
for
rap
idre
spon
seto
pu
blic
hea
lth
emer
gen
cies
.It
wou
ldbe
use
dat
the
dis
cret
ion
ofth
ese
cret
ary
and
wou
ldbe
avai
labl
eu
nti
lex
pen
ded
.
Volume 13, Number 3, 2015 201
against CBRN threats, would increase by $36.7 million inFY2016.
Multiple-hazard and preparedness funding in ASPRwould see a significant increase under the proposed FY2016budget. This is primarily because of an increase of $371.4million in funds provided for Project Bioshield, for a totalof $626.4 million. Although Project Bioshield largelysupports the procurement of MCMs against biologicalthreats, it has been included here because of its statedmission to support the procurement of MCMs againstCBRN threats. ASPR’s BARDA, which would also receivea sizable increase in funding to $521.7 million from $415million in FY2015, is also included in the multiple-hazardanalysis because its mission includes support for develop-ment of MCMs to protect the nation from a broad range ofthreats. The Hospital Preparedness Program (HPP) is an-other notable program contained in ASPR, and it would befunded at $254.6 million, the same level as in FY2015.Similar to State and Local Preparedness and ResponseCapability at CDC, the HPP has seen significant cuts in thepast decade and been reduced by 50% since FY2004.39
Department of Homeland SecurityThe DHS budget for FY2016 would dedicate $1.73 billionin funding for programs focused on multiple hazards andpreparedness. In DHS, the largest proportion of fundingwould be allocated to State and Local Programs ($1.2 bil-lion) in FEMA. Other FEMA programs focused on Pre-paredness and Protection ($190.9), Response ($168.5million), Recovery ($51.5 million), and Mitigation ($25.8million) would bring total FEMA funding in this section to$1.65 billion in the proposed FY2016 budget. Other mul-tiple-hazard and preparedness programs include the In-tegrated Terrorism Risk Assessment (ITRA) program ($2.0million) and the Standards Thrust ($7.4 million) in DHSS&T. The Standards Thrust contributes to setting standardsfor biological, chemical, and other detection and diagnostictechnologies. Planning and Coordination in the Office ofHealth Affairs would receive $5 million, and InternationalCargo Screening for WMD materials in Customs andBorder Protection would receive $69.9 million.19,20
Department of DefenseMultiple-hazard and preparedness programs in the DoDinclude those that support WMD, CBRNE, and emerginginfectious diseases prevention, preparedness, and response.The Army National Guard CBRNE Enterprise, which in-cludes WMD civil support teams that support first re-sponders with identification, assessment, and advice in theevent of a domestic CBRNE incident, and CBRNE capa-bilities to support the teams, would receive $167.7 millionunder the proposed FY2016 budget.40
DTRA’s multiple-hazard and preparedness programsinclude the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) pro-gram, which works to reduce WMD proliferation from the
former Soviet Union and other regions;15 InternationalCounterproliferation programs; and WMD-focused re-search.28 In total, these programs would receive $267.4million under proposed FY2016 funding. This would rep-resent an increase of $22.4 million over estimated FY2015funding levels. DARPA’s Biological Warfare Defense Pro-gram, which focuses on a range of threats including CBRN,would receive $29.3 million, a decrease in funding of $14.5million.16 Multiple-hazard research in CBDP ($151.2 mil-lion) would retain essentially flat funding in the proposedFY2016 budget. 17
Department of StateProposed funding for multiple-hazard and preparednessprograms in the Department of State would remain rela-tively flat in FY2016. The Office of Chemical and Biolog-ical Weapons Affairs in Arms Control, Verification, andCompliance would receive a steady $2.2 million in pro-posed funding. Additionally, the International Security andNonproliferation office (ISN) was included as a wholebecause of difficulty separating funding streams for specificmissions and programs. However, increased granularityin the State Department budget allowed for the analysisof individual programs in the offices of Nonproliferation,Anti-Terrorism, Demining, and Related Programs(NADRP), which was not possible previously. Programs inNADRAP include the Nonproliferation and DisarmamentFund ($25.0 million), Export Control and Related BorderSecurity Assistance ($58.7 million), Global Threat Re-duction ($64.3 million), and Weapons of Mass Destruc-tion Terrorism ($6.2 million).28,41
Environmental Protection AgencyProposed funding in the EPA for multiple-hazard andpreparedness programs would be slightly increased fromFY2015 for a total of $288.5 million. Programs are in-cluded under Homeland Security and Superfund programs.EPA’s Homeland Security focus includes Communicationand Information ($4.1 million), Critical InfrastructureProtection ($12.9 million); Preparedness, Response, andRecovery ($58.3 million); and Protection of EPA Personneland Infrastructure ($14.7 million) programs. In the EPASuperfund, $7.8 million has been proposed for EmergencyPreparedness, and $190.7 million has been proposed forEmergency Response and Removal programs. These pro-grams play a role in EPA’s CBR preparedness and responseto environmental contamination emergencies with impactson human health.33
Department of JusticeThis multiple-hazard and preparedness analysis includesthe National Security Division of the Department of Justice(DoJ). Under the proposed FY2016 budget, fundingfor this program would remain relatively steady at $96.6million.42
202 Health Security
FEDERAL FUNDING FOR HEALTH SECURITY IN FY2016
Table 6. Ebola Emergency Appropriations (in $millions)
FY2015(estimated)
PL 113-164 Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2015 (September 19, 2014)Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR)Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Agency (BARDA)
Ebola Emergency Funding 58.0Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Global Health Ebola Funding 30.0Subtotal PL 113-164 Ebola Emergency Funding 88.0
Public Law 113-235: Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015Department of Defense (DoD)
Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)CBDP
Viral Therapeutics – Ebola 22.7Medical Biological Defense (HFV clinical trials) 27.3
DARPAEbola Response and Preparedness Congressional Add 45.0
Defense-wide ProcurementProcurement of Necessary Equipment 17.0
Subtotal PL 113-235 DoD Ebola Emergency Funding 112.0
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)Office of the Secretary/PHSSEF
Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR)Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Agency (BARDA) 157.0
To be allocated by the Secretary 576.0Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Domestic Preparedness and Response 416.0Public Health Emergency Preparedness program (PHEP) 155.0
International Ebola Response 603.0National Public Health Institutes and Global Health Security 597.0
National Institutes of Health (NIH)National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases 238.0
Food and Drug Administration (FDA)Ebola Emergency Funding
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research 4.8Center for Devices and Radiological Health 2.4Office of the Commissioner 0.4Center for Drug Evaluation and Research 1.9Office of Regulatory Affairs 0.5Medical Countermeasures Initiative (MCMI) 15.0
Subtotal PL 113-235 HHS Ebola Emergency Funding 2,767.0
Department of StateDiplomatic and Consular Programs 36.4Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining, and Related Programs 5.3Bilateral Economic Assistance
Global Health Programs 312.0International Disaster Assistance 1,436.3Economic Support Fund 711.7
USAIDOperating Expenses 19.0Office of Inspector General 5.6
Subtotal PL 113-235 State and USAID Ebola Emergency Funding 2,526.3
Subtotal PL 113-235 Ebola Emergency Funding 5,405.3
Total Emergency Ebola Funding for FY2015 (PL 113-164 + PL 113-235) 5,493.3
*Ebola emergency funds appropriated through PL 113-164 and PL 113-235 are not counted as part of the FY2015 funding totals elsewhere in thisarticle.
BODDIE ET AL.
Volume 13, Number 3, 2015 203
National Science FoundationTwo programs in NSF Homeland Security activities havebeen included in this section of the analysis. These pro-grams are Counterterrorism ($27 million) and EmergencyPlanning and Response ($50.3 million). Both of theseprograms would maintain steady funding from FY2015.24
Department of CommerceMultiple-hazard and preparedness programs in the De-partment of Commerce are located in the Bureau of In-dustry and Security (BIS) Export Administration. Proposedfunding for these programs in FY2016 would total $58.8million.43
US Department of AgricultureFunding for US Department of Agriculture (USDA)programs related to multiple hazards and preparednesswould remain flat under the proposed FY2016 budget at$54 million. Programs include the Food Safety and In-spection Service’s (FSIS) Public Health Data Commu-nication Infrastructure System ($35 million), the Animaland Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) program forEmergency Management ($17 million), and the Office ofHomeland Security and Emergency Coordination ($2million).44
Department of Veterans AffairsThe Emerging Pathogens/Bioterrorism program in theDepartment of Veterans Affairs (VA) would receive $1million in the proposed FY2016 budget, representing flatfunding from FY2014 and FY2015.45
Ebola Emergency Appropriations
in FY2015
The Ebola outbreak in West Africa, and cases of the diseasein the US, spurred Congress to appropriate emergencyEbola funding in 2 separate appropriations laws:
� Public Law 113-164, the Continuing AppropriationsResolution passed on September 19, 2014;46
� Public Law 113-235, the Consolidated and FurtherContinuing Appropriations Act passed on December16, 2014.47
Together, the 2 laws provided a total of $5.5 billion inemergency appropriations for Ebola.
PL 113-164 provided $58.0 million for BARDA and$30.0 million for Global Health Ebola Funding in CDC,for a total of $88 million.47
The second appropriation (PL 113-235) was muchlarger, totaling $5.4 billion. In this appropriation, DoDreceived $112 million in funding for DTRA and DARPA
to support research and development of Ebola vaccines andtherapeutics and response to the epidemic, and for DoDprocurement of necessary equipment for the response.HHS received $2.8 billion, with $890 million appropriatedto ASPR for Ebola MCM development, $1.8 billion to theCDC for both domestic and international responses, $238million to NIAID in NIH for Ebola research, and $25million to FDA for regulatory action surrounding EbolaMCMs and clinical trials.39,47 The State Department andUSAID received $2.6 billion for international responsecoordination, diplomacy, and disaster assistance activities(see Table 6). 47
Conclusions
Federal funding for health security includes programsdedicated to civilian biological, radiological and nuclear,chemical, pandemic influenza and emerging infectiousdisease, and multiple-hazard and preparedness. In FY2016,proposed federal funding for health security totaled ap-proximately $13.7 billion. Of that total proposed forFY2016, 59% is allocated to multiple-hazard and pre-paredness programs, dedicated to building systems that canprotect the country from a variety of threats to health.Radiological/nuclear programs would receive 19% ofhealth security funds, which is higher than other threat-focused programs even when excluding programs focusedon nation-state nonproliferation, missile defense, and USstockpile stewardship.
Biodefense programs are budgeted to receive 10% ($1.4billion) of health security funds in FY2016, representing adecrease in funding from FY2015 of $304 million. Pan-demic influenza and emerging infectious disease programswould receive 9% ($1.2 billion) of the health securitybudget in FY2016, an increase to this category of fundingof $200 million. Programs dedicated to chemical incidentprevention, preparedness, and response would receive 3%($423 million) of the health security funding total, with asmall reduction in funding of $4 million from FY2015.
Finally, in FY2015, Congress appropriated emergencyfunding for the international and domestic response to theEbola epidemic originating in West Africa. Total emer-gency funding for Ebola in FY2015 was $5.5 billion.
References
1. Schuler A. Billions for biodefense: federal agency biodefensefunding, FY2001-FY2005. Biosecur Bioterror 2004;2(2):86-96.
2. Schuler A. Billions for biodefense: federal agency biodefensebudgeting, FY2005-FY2006. Biosecur Bioterror 2005;3(2):94-101.
3. Lam C, Franco C, Schuler A. Billions for biodefense: federalagency biodefense funding, FY2006-FY2007. Biosecur Bio-terror 2006;4(2):113-127.
FEDERAL FUNDING FOR HEALTH SECURITY IN FY2016
204 Health Security
4. Franco C, Deitch S. Billions for biodefense: federal agencybiodefense funding, FY2007-FY2008. Biosecur Bioterror2007;5(2):117-133.
5. Franco C. Billions for biodefense: federal agency biodefensefunding, FY2008-FY2009. Biosecur Bioterror 2008;6(2):131-146.
6. Franco C. Billions for biodefense: federal agency biodefensefunding, FY2009-FY2010. Biosecur Bioterror 2009;7(3):291-309.
7. Franco C, Sell TK. Federal agency biodefense funding,FY2010-FY2011. Biosecur Bioterror 2010;8(2):129-149.
8. Franco C, Sell TK. Federal agency biodefense funding,FY2011-FY2012. Biosecur Bioterror 2011;9(2)117-137.
9. Franco C, Sell TK. Federal agency biodefense funding,FY2012-FY2013. Biosecur Bioterror 2012;10(2):162-181.
10. Sell TK, Watson M. Federal agency biodefense funding,FY2013-FY2014. Biosecur Bioterror 2013;11(3):196-215.
11. Sell TK, Franco C. Funding for nuclear consequence-relatedprograms, FY2012-FY2013. Biosecur Bioterror 2012;10(4):417-419.
12. Boddie CR, Sell TK, Watson MC. Federal funding forhealth security in FY2015. Biosecur Bioterror 2014;12(4):163-177.
13. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NationalHealth Security Strategy of the United States of America. De-cember 2009. http://www.phe.gov/Preparedness/planning/authority/nhss/strategy/Documents/nhss-final.pdf. AccessedMay 8, 2014.
14. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Imple-mentation Plan for the National Health Security Strategy of theUnited States of America. May 2012. http://www.phe.gov/Preparedness/planning/authority/nhss/ip/Documents/nhss-ip.pdf. Accessed May 8, 2014.
15. U.S. Department of Defense. Defense Threat ReductionAgency. Cooperative Threat Reduction Program. FY2016Budget Estimates. February 2015. http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/fy2016/budget_justification/pdfs/01_Operation_and_Maintenance/O_M_VOL_1_PART_2/CTR_OP-5.pdf. Accessed April 2, 2015.
16. U.S. Department of Defense. FY2016 President’s BudgetSubmission. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency RDT&EBudget. February 2015. http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/fy2016/budget_justification/pdfs/03_RDT_and_E/DARPA_0400D_RDTE_MasterJustificationBook_Defense_Advanced_Research_Project.pdf. AccessedApril 2, 2015.
17. U.S. Department of Defense. FY2016 President’s BudgetSubmission. Chemical and Biological Defense Program RTD&EDefense-Wide. February 2015. http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/fy2016/budget_justification/pdfs/03_RDT_and_E/RDTE_MasterJustificationBook_Chemical_Biological_Defense_Program_PB_2016.pdf. Ac-cessed April 2, 2015.
18. U.S. Department of Defense. Defense Health Program.FY2016 Budget Estimates. February 2015. http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/fy2016/budget_justification/pdfs/09_Defense_Health_Program/DHP_PB16_Vol_I-II.pdf. Accessed April 2, 2015.
19. U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Budget in Brief:FY2016. http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/FY_2016_DHS_Budget_in_Brief.pdf. Accessed April 2, 2015.
20. U.S. Department of Homeland Security. CongressionalBudget Justification: FY2016. http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/DHS_FY2016_Congressional_Budget_Justification_15_0325.pdf. Accessed April 2, 2015.
21. Personal communication with Department of HomelandSecurity agency representative, April 16, 2015.
22. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. FY2016Budget in Brief. Strengthening Health and Opportunity forAll Americans. http://www.hhs.gov/budget/fy2016/fy-2016-budget-in-brief.pdf. Accessed April 2, 2015.
23. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. FY2016Food and Drug Administration Justification of Estimates forAppropriations Committees. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/Reports/BudgetReports/UCM432322.pdf. Accessed April 2, 2015.
24. National Science Foundation. FY2015 Request to Congress:Homeland Security Activities Summary. http://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/fy2015/pdf/09_fy2015.pdf. Accessed May 8,2014.
25. Schwartz SI, Choubey D. Nuclear Security Spending: AssessingCosts, Examining Priorities. Washington, DC: Carnegie En-dowment; 2009.
26. U.S. Department of Energy. FY2016 Congressional BudgetRequest: National Nuclear Security Administration. Volume I.February 2015. http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/02/f19/FY2016BudgetVolume1_1.pdf. Accessed April 2, 2015.
27. U.S. Department of Defense. FY2016 President’s BudgetSubmission. Defense Threat Reduction Agency RDT&E Defense-Wide. February 2015. http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/fy2016/budget_justification/pdfs/03_RDT_and_E/RDTE_MasterJustificationBook_Defense_Threat_Reduction_Agency_PB_2016.pdf. Accessed April 2,2015.
28. U.S. Department of State. FY2016 Congressional BudgetJustification. February 2, 2015. http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/236395.pdf. Accessed April 2, 2015.
29. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. FY2016 Justificationof Appropriation Estimates for the Committee on Appropriations.February 2015. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-02/documents/epa_fy_2016_congressional_justification.pdf. Accessed April 2, 2015.
30. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. FY2016 CongressionalBudget Justification. 2015. http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1503/ML15030A093.pdf. Accessed April 2, 2015.
31. U.S. Department of Defense. FY2016 Budget Estimates:Overseas Contingency Operations Operation and Maintenance.February 2015. http://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/fy2016/budget_justification/pdfs/01_Operation_and_Maintenance/O_M_VOL_1_PART_2/Volume_I_Part_II.pdf. Accessed April 24, 2015.
32. U.S. Department of the Army. FY2016 Budget Estimates:Chemical Agents Munitions Destruction, Defense. February2015. http://asafm.army.mil/Documents/OfficeDocuments/Budget/budgetmaterials/fy16//camdd.pdf. Accessed April 24,2015.
33. Environmental Protection Agency. FY2016 Budget in Brief. Feb-ruary 2015. http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/P100LK5H.PDF?Dockey = P100LK5H.PDF. Accessed April 24, 2015.
34. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. FY2016Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Justification forEstimates for Appropriation Committees. February 2015.
BODDIE ET AL.
Volume 13, Number 3, 2015 205
http://www.cdc.gov/fmo/topic/Budget%20Information/appropriations_budget_form_pdf/FY2016_CDC_CJ_FINAL.pdf. Accessed April 2, 2015.
35. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NationalInstitute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases FY2016 Budget.February 2015. http://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/Documents/FY2016CJ.pdf. Accessed April 2, 2015.
36. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. Ac-tive CounterACT Researchers & Projects. Updated February 21,2015. http://www.ninds.nih.gov/research/counterterrorism/counterACT_researchers_projects.htm. Accessed April 24, 2015.
37. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Emergingand Re-emerging Infectious Diseases. March 10, 2010. http://www.niaid.nih.gov/topics/emerging/Pages/introduction.aspx.Accessed April 24, 2015.
38. Estimates of funding for various research, condition, anddisease categories (RCDC). National Institutes of Healthwebsite. February 5, 2015. http://report.nih.gov/categorical_spending.aspx. Accessed April 24, 2015.
39. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. FY2016Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund: Justificationof Estimates for Appropriations Committees. February 2015.http://www.hhs.gov/budget/fy2016/fy2016-public-health-social-services-emergency-budget-justification.pdf. Ac-cessed April 24, 2015.
40. U.S. Department of Defense. Department of the ArmyFY2016 Budget Estimates: National Guard Personnel, Army.February 2015. http://asafm.army.mil/Documents/OfficeDocuments/Budget/budgetmaterials/fy16/milpers//ngpa.pdf.Accessed April 24, 2015.
41. U.S. Department of State. FY2016 Congressional BudgetJustification: Appendix 1. February 2015. http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/236393.pdf. Accessed April 24,2015.
42. U.S. Department of Justice. FY2016 Budget Summary.February 2015. http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/jmd/pages/attachments/2015/02/02/2016_budget_summary_pages_5-12.pdf. Accessed April 24, 2015.
43. U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Industry and Se-curity FY2016 President’s Submission. February 2015. http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/FY16CJ/BIS_FY_2016_CJ_Final_508_Compliant.pdf. Accessed April 24, 2015.
44. U.S. Department of Agriculture. FY2016 Budget Summaryand Annual Performance Plan. February 2015. http://www.obpa.usda.gov/budsum/fy16budsum.pdf. Accessed April 24,2015.
45. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. FY2016 Funding andFY2016 Advance Appropriations: Volume II Medical Programsand Information Technology Programs. February 2015. http://www.va.gov/budget/docs/summary/Fy2016-VolumeII-MedicalProgramsAndInformationTechnology.pdf. Accessed April 24,2015.
46. Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2015. PL 113-164.http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-113publ164/pdf/PLAW-113publ164.pdf. Accessed April 24, 2015.
47. Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act,2015. PL 113-235. https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/83/text. Accessed April 24, 2015.
Address correspondence to:Crystal Boddie, MPH
AssociateUPMC Center for Health Security
621 East Pratt St., Ste. 210Baltimore, MD 21202
Email: [email protected]
FEDERAL FUNDING FOR HEALTH SECURITY IN FY2016
206 Health Security