NIH, NEI consolidation plan ‘jeopardizes’ vision research, draws AOA opposition

Consolidating the National Eye Institute (NEI) into an amalgam of disciplinary institutes and centers jeopardizes optometric research and public education, the AOA warns with a U.S. House appropriations spending proposal. 

In June, the House Appropriations Committee released the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies (Labor-HHS) Appropriations bill with a proposal for a complete restructuring of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) that included the consolidation of 27 institutes and centers (ICs) into just 15 ICs. Notably, the proposal recommended the consolidation of the NEI with the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR) and National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) into a broader “National Institute of Neuroscience and Brain Research.” 

Additionally, the FY 2025 bill would further cut $48 billion in funding for public health and biomedical research programs at the NIH.  

The proposal drew the concerted ire of numerous health policy and advocacy groups, including the AOA, as such sweeping changes would have an immediate consequence on ICs’ scientific and educational contributions without any input or review from the communities affected by those actions. 

In a letter to House Appropriations Committee Chair Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., and Ranking Member Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., the AOA encouraged appropriators to remove the language entirely from the FY 2025 Labor-HHS bill. 

“To quickly reorganize these institutes that play a role in education, public awareness and research without greater dialogue could have serious negative impacts,” reads the letter, signed by AOA President Steven T. Reed, O.D. 

The AOA letter further requests an opportunity to discuss and provide insights and guidance on: 

• The overall role of the NEI.
• How the NEI can be more impactful by ensuring all physician types have equal opportunities to obtain training grant mechanisms to support graduate education.
• Ensuring the American public has access to reliable eye health and vision information. 

Proposal threatens federal vision research resources, innovations 

Any proposal that combines the NEI with other ICs, such as the NIDCR or NINDS, would inevitably dilute resources currently supporting vision research and likely jeopardize significant innovations driven by vision scientists, notes Heather Anderson, O.D., Ph.D., AOA Council on Research chair and acting associate dean for research at The Ohio State University College of Optometry.  

“The field of vision science is highly specialized, many aspects of which do not overlap at all with the proposed partner institutes,” Dr. Anderson says. “The proposed broader institute could result in proposals from optometric researchers being evaluated and scored by individuals largely unfamiliar with the unique aspects of vision science that differ dramatically from other approaches in the health sciences, as well as competing for resources with widely diverse priorities.” 

While Congress is under pressure to identify areas for cost savings and reform, Dr. Anderson says any reorganization plan for the NIH, and especially the NEI, should be done in thoughtful consultation with the scientific community that can identify barriers to advancing scientific discovery. She reiterates that eliminating the NEI altogether would pose a significant threat to advancing vision research, including such important work done by optometric researchers. 

Critically, it’s high-caliber, scientific research that leads to evidence-based practice. The NEI, as an independent institute, represents the best federal vehicle for supporting eye health and vision research. That’s why Dr. Anderson says it’s vital to advocate for keeping the NEI standalone. 

Learn more about the importance of optometric researchers in advancing eye health and vision care.