The major public effort by the IOM to secure comments is the passive posting of forms to be filled out on the IOM web site.
How many responses has the IOM received on those forms? The IOM has not disclosed that information despite two inquiries earlier this month by the California Stem Cell Report.
The prestigious institute is undertaking the study of $3 billion agency under contract with CIRM, which is paying the IOM $700,000. Some CIRM directors have expressed hope that the IOM findings will help build support for another multi-billion dollar state bond measure to renew financing for CIRM. It is scheduled to run out of money for new grants in five years.
So far, the IOM panel has held two public meetings, one in Washington, D.C., and one in the San Francisco area. The final California hearing is scheduled for April 10 in Irvine with the last public meetings scheduled for later this year in Washington.
So far, the panel has heard only from CIRM employees or directors as well as researchers who have received tens of millions of dollars in CIRM grants. The IOM has not heard publicly from a single independent witness.
The IOM has posted on its web site forms seeking comments from the public, grant recipients, beneficiary institutions and businesses. However, passive postings of forms are unlikely to generate more than a relative handful of responses. To produce significant numbers requires aggressive and targeted follow-up.
It is also unclear exactly what the IOM is doing to seek information from biotech businesses and unsuccessful grant applicants. Some businesses have complained publicly about the tiny share of funding that industry has received. And some CIRM directors have expressed concern for several years about the inadequacies of business funding.
On Feb. 12, the California Stem Cell Report queried the IOM about its efforts at outreach, asking for specifics on what is being done. Christine Stencel, a spokeswoman for the IOM, replied,
"The IOM has been obtaining and compiling lists of organizations and people to circulate the questionnaires as widely as possible among target groups. For example, IOM has sent a notice to some 300 stakeholder groups encouraging participation."Other specifics were not forthcoming. (The full text of the questions and responses can be found here.)
On Feb. 15, the California Stem Cell Report followed up with these additional questions,
"Regarding the 300 stakeholder groups, how are those defined? Please give me a few examples.As of this writing, the IOM has not responded to those questions. We will carry its response verbatim when we receive it. Sphere: Related Content
"Based on your response, is it correct to say that the IOM is not sending out questionnaires directly to all CIRM grant applicants, including those who were rejected?
"Is it correct to say that no special effort -- other than that described in your response -- is being made to seek responses from stem cell businesses?
"The failure to provide numbers on the responses so far would indicate that the numbers are so small that the IOM is choosing not to disclose them. If that is not the case, please email me the numbers."