federal funding for health security in fy2016 · in fy2016, $264.6 million is budgeted for dtra’s...

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)


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.


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.


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)


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.


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.


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


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.


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.


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.


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

.


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.


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


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)


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

.


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


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.


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.


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.


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]


206 Health Security