DEPARTMENT OF HEA LTH, EDUCATION

AND WELFARE
Health Services and Mental Health Administration

‘Division of Regional Medical Programs

National Advisory Council on
Regional Medical Programs

Minutes of Meeting
February 20-21, 1969

’ National Institutes of Health
Conference Room 4
Bullding 31
 

 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE

National Advisory Council on Regional Medical Programs

Minutes of Fifteenth Meeting 1/ 2/
February 20-21, 1969 ©

The National Advisory Council on Regional. Medical Programs convened
for its fifteenth meeting at 8:30 a.m., Thursday, February 20, 1969,
in Conference Rocm 4, Building 31, National Institutes of Health,

“Bethesda, Maryland. Dr. Stanley W. Olson, Director, Division of

Regional Medical Programs presided for the Administrator, Health
Services and Mental Health Administration, who was unable to be
present for all of the meeting.

The Council members present were:

Dr. Michael J. Brennan Dr. Clark H. Millikan

Dr. Edwin L. Crosby Dr. Edmund D. Pellegrino.
Dr. Michael E. DeBakey Dr. Alfred M. Popma

Dr. Bruce W. Everist Dr. Mack I. Shanholtz
Dr. John R. Hogness Me. Curtis Treen

Mrs. Florence Wyckoff _
The counesl Liaison member attending was:
Dr. A. Earl Walker, NINDS (2/20 only)
A listing of DRMP staff members, and others, attending is appended.
CALL TO ORDER AND OPENING REMARKS |

Doctor Olson called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m.

 

Proceedings of meetings are restricted unless cleared by the Office of
the Administrator, HSMHA. ‘The restriction relates to all material
submitted for discussion at the meetings, the supplemental material,
and all other official documents, including the agenda.

For the record, it is noted that members absent themselves from the
meeting wnen the Council is discussing applications: (a) from their
respective institutions, or (b) in which a conflict of interest might
occur. This procedure does not, of course, apply to en bloc actions—
only when the application is under individual discussion.
IT.

III.

 

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Doctor Olson welcomed Mrs. Florence Wyckoff and Dr. Michael Brennan
to membership on the Council. ,

Dr. Russell Roth, Dr. Anthony Curreri, and Mrs. Florence Mahoney were
introduced and participated in the meeting as observers (these three,
plus Dr. Bland Cannon and Dr. Herman Branson, have been nominated to

become members of the Council beginning with the next meeting).

CONSIDERATION OF FUTURE MEETING DATES

The date of May 26-27, 1969, for the next meeting was confirmed. Dates
for the following two meetings were changed and are now scheduled for
August 26-27, 1969, and December 16-17, 1969. The meeting for March 23-24,
1970, remains as previously scheduled.

CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 1968 MEETING

The Council unanimously recommended approval of the November 25-26, 1968,
meeting as written.

A PROGRAM STATUS REPORT

 

A. Organizational Changes

 

1. Doctor Olson announced the proposed reorganization of the

Division of Regional Medical Programs and reviewed briefly the
reassignment of various functions under the terms of the new organi-
zational arrangement. He specifically mentioned the reassignment of
Mrs. Martha Phillips, Acting Associate Director for Grant and Contract
Policy, whose duties will include working directly with the National
Advisory. Council on matters relating to policy and the considerations
and recommendations of Council in this regard. He also introduced
Mrs. Sarah J. Silsbee who is Acting Assistant Director for Grants Review
and Mr. Robert Jones who is Acting Chief of the newly created Programs
Assistance Branch in the Office of Operations and Development.

2. Dr. Donald Chadwick reported on the recommendations of the
Task Force on the organization of Regional Medical Programs
Service. Doctor Olson further discussed plans for the implementation
of these recommendations and outlined the steps by which the two
Divisions will be joined in a single administrative unit, working toward
a single set of goals.

In response to questions raised by members of the Council, a
resume of the present budgeting of both Divisions was presented; relating
 

 

 

one to the other, both in terme of allocations for staffing and central
office operations, and for y : peration by grants and contracts.
Specific plans for con 1 of the activities of the several
Branches of the Chronic Disease

we

   
     

gh For
nn

Tllustrative of these ~Division. efforts, Dr. Richard
Manegold discussed the opportunities to be provided for the accom lish-—
ment of research.* He recalled the recommendations of the President's
Commission on Heart Disease, Cancer, and Stroke; the inclusion of
research in the langusge of Public Law 89-239; the charge to the
Regional Medical Progra, made at the time of the hearings on the
extension of P.L. 89-229, to move actively into areas of clinical research,
especially drug studies. ,

 

 

  
   
 

  
  

 

 

As a specific example Doctor Manegold presented a proposal

being developed jointly by the Division of Regional Medical Programs

and the Heart Disease Control Pranch, with the advice of the National
Heart Institute, to establish a pilot laboratory for lipid typing.*

This is being proposed for support under a DRMP contract. The Council
strongly endorsed the Division's efforts along these lines and encouraged
the staff to move ahead with cereparation of a contract proposal.

The Council unanimously agreed or: the importance of thorough assessment
of this contract proposal. and others in this general category. ‘They
expressed serious concern about tne maintenance of quality in such
research and stressed the importance of high quality clinical research
programs as a mechanism for the involvement and continuing education
of physicians both inside and outside major medical centers.

 
  

    

   

a
wo
S

In addition to these general considerations the Division was
cautioned to provide for assessment of projects of this kind on a
number of other bases: ‘To be certain thabthe disease entity involved

_was one of sufficient importance in socio-economic terms; that the

procedures or drugs to be tested have been thoroughly investigated for
their potential side effects; that they be limited to "research iin
application" of the kird that is particularly appropriate in Regional
Medical Programs; that they involve substantial numbers of patients

and are inter~institutional or truly regional in contrast to the research
broadly supported by the National Institutes of Health which is usually
intra-institutional or even intra-laboratory. The vouncil was explicit
in its recommendation that projects of this kind have thorough review
by the staff of DRMP ard of the relevant program components of the
Chronic Disease Divisicn, and especially by the relevant Institute for
its usefulness as an avjunct to related Institute-supported activities.

  
  

In regard to the specific proposal at hand, the Council
recommended that it be prepared in final form for review before the
contract is actuaily let. -
 

 

a4

Dr. Margaret Sloan presented a resume of the progress and
current activities of the Commission on Cancer of the American College
of Surgeons.* She explained the participation of the Cancer Control
Branch of the Division of Chronic Disease in support of the Commission's
activities in the past. Many of tne Council members were familiar
with the work of this Commission and the broad involvement in it of
many interested groups other than the Collece itself. After considerable
discussion the Council agreed that Regional Medical Programs participation
in future support of the Commission is appropriate and that such support
might be provided either under a contvact or as a grant under the newly
authorized Section 910 - Multi-program Activities. As part of the
agreement (either a grant or contract) the Council recommends that the
Division insist upon the inclusion of some mechanism for evaluation of
both past accomplishments and future activities and that a representative
of the Division of Regional Medical Programs be named to membership on
the Commission.

At the completion of Doctor Sloan's presentation, Mr. Irving
Lewis, Deputy Director, Health Services and Mental Health Administration,
joined the meeting. He provided further background on the status of
the fiscal year 1970 budget and a report on preliminary discussions with
Secretary Finch and his immediate staff in regard to the place of
Regional Medical Programs in the health related activities of the
Department ¢ Health, Education, and Welfare.

 

B. Follow-up on the special meeting on January ll, 1969

Doctor Olson reported briefly on the events which followed
the special meeting of the Council held on January 11, 1969. He
described the system of priorities developed administratively for
the funding of Regional Medical Programs under the constraints
prescribed by the Department to postpone obligations in FY 1969 until
the amount of FY 1970 appropriation is more certain. He explained
that he will propose, through the Health Services and Mental Health
Administration, another plan, making maximum use of whatever funds
become available to us in the fiscal year according to modifications of
these same general funding priorities.

 

C. Effect of administrative decisions upon the recommendation
made by Council in Novere«

 

 

The effect of these administrative decisions upon the
recommendations mede by the Council at its meeting in November was
summarized and plans for possible further funding of some of the approved
but unfunded applications was outlined.

n an, D4 Phe Stee viet cae Qo bbe te niet Beata

Mrs. Phillips explained tne table showing the funding level for

 
 

 

  

eaministracion and for projects in each of the 55 Regions,
sal effect on those levels of the requests to be

both centres
and of the m

aapard estar po Po be laey pypot tas
previewed Li arn the meevuing.

 

eT RIS ED kag tee
FUNDING PROTRUTTO

 

 

A. For the balance of FY 1969

A sumesry presented by the Financial Managemert Branch of the
Division shc that ea balance of approximately $24,000,000 remained
available for obligaticn during the balance of the fiscal year. This
figure was contrasted with the approximately $60,000,000 request represented
by the applications tc be reviewed later in the meeting, and an estimate
of the requests to be processed for Council review in May.

 
    

B. For FY 1970 and beyond

 

Doctor Olson introduced some of the preliminary plans being
formulated by the Division for possible changes in administration of
the Regional Medical Program grant system.

Mrs. Prillips spoke of the need for a granting mechanism better
suited to the requirements of Regional Medical Programs grants .*

Mr. Lawton explained the Division's plans to develop a system
of “anniversary review" which would make it possible for the Council
to consider each Region in its totality each year, or perhaps every
two or three years, with staff review and special study at the. interval
anniversaries.

In further recognition of this new phase in Regional Medical
Programs! development, the Division has begun consideration of a
mechanism to make some portion of Regional Medical Program funds available
to Regions as basic sugpert grants. A preliminary proposal presented
by Mr. Lawton outlined the circumstances which generate the necessity
for this step in the preliminary procedure for carrying it out.#

After discussion of the staff presentations the Council expressed
unanimous recognition of the need for changes along these lines and
requested that the staff continue to develop, for consideration at the
May meeting, specific proposals in four principal areas:

1. A system of submission and review of applications to
he built around a single grant anniversary; allowing
for annual, or perhaps biennial, assessment and peer
group review of the entire program, along with the
review of supplemental grant requests.
 

 

Vil.

Vill.

-6-

2. A clearer definition of the structure and function
of what has become identified as the “oore'™ component
of the Region's activities and an assessment of its
relative contribution to achieving program goals.

3, A system by means of which some portion of RMP funds
be made available to the regions as basic support
grants, in combination with the present system of
awarding fur. “na competitive basis.

4. A means of assigning priority ratings to Regional
Medical Programs applications which can be based on .
an expression derived from two scales: One reflecting
an assessment of over-all program accomplishment and
one for measuring intrinsic merit of individual program
components.

LFGISLATIVE PROJECTIONS

 

A. Preparation for hearings on Fiscal 1970 budget

Doctor Chac ck reviewed briefly the position to be taken
by the Division in defense of its part of the President's budget
and explained the amalgamating of the budgets of the Chronic
Disease Division and the Division of Regional Medical Programs.

B. Program assessment in preparation for legislative extension

Mr. Peterson outlined the Division's preparations for requesting
the extension of Title IX of the Public Health Service Act (P.L.
90-574) which expires June 30, 1970. Mr. Peterson reported on the
creation of an ad hoc committee to assess Regional Medical Program
progress and impact, and on the reconmendation which caneout of its
first meeting on January 25, 1969.* Dr. Bruce W. Everist represents
the National Advisory Council on this committee.

CONSIDERATION OF GRANT APPLICATIONS

fied issues represented in this group

 

 

A. Specifically icentit
of applications wnica require Council's special attention

 

During the process of review of the applications, the staff
identified a number of questions which were raised repeatedly and
the answer to which required a statement of policy to be made by
the Division with the advice of the Council.

atiy of these Miscues"™ were selected for presentation. All

 
 

 

addressed in t! Division publications and
presentations. & ; Council on these
six issues wil 1 *, Bhweaz. e rrevious statemer bs and
provide a bas 3 -and consistent application
of these po 011

Lon ‘and by the Regions:

 
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
   

 

1.

; this matter and offers the
sion of the definitions set forth
Progpam Guidelines : .

The Council reel T ins |
following criteria fer
the current Regions

    

an

toate

 

Certain criteria have been adopted for deciding ywinether or not
an activity is to be consis ot suing education and training
e.g., activities must in general not be oe designed principally to.
qualify one for a degree, Gipioma. oP Board certification, therefore,
internship and residency * progr » heen excluded from primary
consideration. The ecaucation training activity should lead to
the assumption of new responsibility in the already chosen career field,
or update knowledge and skill ina diffe spent but related health field.
In general, therefore, interest is in task- oriented training.

 

 

    
   

 

Training designed principal] 5 preparation for a research career
in the biomedical sciences have been exe luded. Tt has been stated that
Regional Medical Progran Pundinys is not to be used to replace existing
sources of support for educat- tonal activities. In general Regional
Medical Program funding should be used in conjunction with other available
sources of funding, whenever possible.

   

 

To has been recognized from the begimming that most activities funded
by Reglona Medical Promrams mighs theoretically be funded by other
agencies. Criteria nave. been developed by which activities are judged

with overlapping interest woien is the area where recruitment and basic

tresning requests wovaliy Pell, for SSIG, «

 

s 4-

. The activity must isfy a documented need of a
Regional NM L ean’ and must be shown to
have 2 relatively high priority for funding.

 

_ Other avenues of funding ius st have beer: explored
and found inedeguate either by the Regiun or by
the Continuing Education and Training. Branch of
the Division of Regional “iodieal Programs. In
many CASES 5 funding is requested for projects
because of a lack of available funds by other

roy

   

 
 

 

      

: adical Programs or the
explore the possibility of

1 Medical Program funding
le from other sources.
sancies such as the office of

the Department of Labor are beginning
to support parts of recruitment and training
activities affecting the health field.

phasing ous
as money becom
Other Federe

30

Ch bt
a

ee dq ¢

The Region or the Continuing Education and Training
Branch of the Division of Regional Medical Programs
must have explored the possibility of joint funding
with other interested agencies. .

If the education and training activity has been shown
to be necessary to achieving the purposes of a Regional
Medical Program, and the above criteria have been met ,
then the proposed project may be approved for funding.

 
 
   

2. ivitie ~ram Areas nob.

> [aw 89-239
A. Disease categorical versus comprehensive projects

The Council reaffirms its endorsement of the policies in this regard
as set forth in the Regional Medical Program Guidelines, Chapter 3,
item V. However, in so doing, it emphasizes that full consideration
will be given to applications for activities which pertain to problems
in heart disease, cancer, stroke, and related diseases but which also
have an impact on the diagnosis and treatment of other diseases; and/or

fulfill a specified objective of the Regicn.

B. Projects targeved for specific population groups

The Council, recognizirg the diverse problems of medically
disadvantaged consumer SPcups both urban and rural, Urges that
specific pianning to meet the health needs of such groups be a function
of Regional Medical Programs.

NOTE: In discussing this matter, the Council expressed its
interest in further atseussion of the special problems and appropriate
role of Regional Medical Programs in metropolitan communities ,
especially in high density population areas served by many centers
natant pvanttew.  Soaeh se teem will be placed on the agenda

wey -

 
 

 

Ja

3. Major Investments of Regional Medical Programs
Grant funds in Medical Fguipment

The Council agreed that, in order to be considered for final
recommendation by it, all applications which include requests for
“——-~. purchase of major items of fixed and moveable therapeutic and diagnostic

equipmerit must include.

A statement of the rationale for charging any or all of
purchase price of the equipment to the grant, and of the
justification for the proportioning of the shared costs
among those involved in the purchase ; '

. -A proposed plan for accounting and fiscal control of the-
revenues accruing to the project (see HEW Grants Administration
Mamial Issuance, Disposition of Grant-Related Income) ;

Adequate evidence that the project plan, including the

acquiring of the equipment, has been reviewed, and if
. necessary, approved by the appropriate local plarming
agencies.

4. Establishment of Regional and Multi-Regional Resources
A. Television production and network facilities

Council recommends that all new operational projects requesting
major investments or funds for equipment and activities in television
be thoroughly studied by Division staff and expert consultants for
consideration for funding under the new authority for Multi-program
Services provided under Section 910. It further recommends that
applications for continuation and renewal of previously funded major
television activities be reviewed by the same group of expert consultants
on the basis of the progress being made in the applicant Region toward
its television objectives, and how those activities might be related
or expanded to a Multi-program Service.

B. Radiation dosimetry services
The Council accepted the staff's recommendations :
A temporary hold on funding of such projects, and

- .
© , CMa greta of a tan peetibhaa Ea comoteh oP

expert conmuitais inciuging representatives of the
 

 

-10-

American College of Radiology and the Conmittee

on Radiation Therapy Studies (National Cancer
Institute), to advise the Division and the Council.
The committee's special attention should be directed
to the possible use of the new grant authority
(Section 910) for Multi-program Services.

B. Recommendation for action_on individual applications

A new system for Council review and recommendation on Regional
Medical Program applications was introduced by Mrs. Phillips. . This
system provides for individual discussion and action on applications
from. Regions requesting initial operational grants, applications for
major program changes, and applications which present question of
policy requiring special Council attention; and for bloc action on
all other applications for supplemental activities, according to the
recommendations of the Review Conmittee.

The Council was agreed on the valve of, and necessity for, greater
reliance on the site visitors! and the Review Committee's assessment
of the merit of the 7...’ vidual proposals and the validity of the total
program approach. A-’..r considerable discussion, however, they agreed
to request the staff to further alter the arrangements for their role
in review, as follows:

1. To assign each application to one Council member
and to send him, well in advance of the meeting,
a copy of the complete document.

2. To continue to send to each member of the Council
a complete set of the "blue sheets" which include
a history cf the applicant region, a summary of the
application under review, and a statement of the
Review Comm’ ’tee's comments and recommendations;
and all re. .nt site visit reports.

3. To arrange the materials so that the findings
of the site visiters can be easily correlated
with the final recommendations of the Review
Committee.

4. To have an oral report of each site visit made
either by a “ouncil member or a member of the
senior staff of DRYP.

5. To have available on the first day of the meeting,

 

Sew fe ee oe We ASRIELI 2

certain details.

2 BY

 
 

 

Record of the actions taken by the National Advisory Council,
on Regional Medical Programs applications considered by them
at the meeting on February 20 and.el, 1969 I/

Approval, as requested, and as recomended and commented

 

NOTE: The Council requested that staff be
assured of the budgeting details on project
#4, and that the region be urged to arrive
at a satisfactory cooperative inter-regional
arrangement with the New Jersey Regional

for two additional years, at the present
annual level, to be awarded as the operational

 

TI.
upon by the Review Committee:
GREATER DELAWARE VALLEY
Operational = 01-$587 ,6313 02-$619,7343 03-$629 ,627.
Medical Program.
Planning = Approval for extension of the commitment
core.
LOUISIANA
01-$425 , 300; 02-$400 186; 03-$412,181
INDIANA
01-$82 ,036; 02-$88 ,850
V/

All amounts are direct costs only and, unless otherwise specified,
refer to 12 month periods.

The designations 01, 02, ete., relate to the first, second, etc.,
budget periods of the subject application, not necessarily the
budget periods which they will actually supplement.

 

 
 

it.

°*

 

MICHIGAN

O1-$49 ,135

GEORGIA

ee

01--$309,818 (this six mc*’': budget to be expanded for a 15-month period);
02-$659 43.4

NORTH CAROLINA

 O1-$50,407; 02-$145,207; 03-$144 ,572

MOUNTAIN STATES

01-$256 5375 02-8247 ,46:", 03-$272,301, O4-$279 037, 05-$273,252

ILLINOIS
01-$184 ,500; 02-$250,000; 03-$270,000 | : -

SUSQUEHANNA VALLEY

2/69.1 = 01-$129,742
2/69.2 = 01-$231,175 (Nine months only)
2/69.3 = 01-$169,202; 02-$44,014; 03-$45,614

Approval, in part, as specifically reconmended and commented upon
by the Review Committee
ALABAMA.

2/69.1 = 01-$256,683; 02-$188,500
2/69.2 = 01-$542 369; 02--SH21 617

 

NORTHERN NEW ENGLAND

 
 

 

NORTHLANDS

01-$1, 305,934; 02-$1,386,429; 03~-$1,394,962

OHIO SiATE

01-$157 ,890; 02-$134,258; 03-$55,572

OKLAHOMA

.01-$1, 204,123 (Core for ten months only); 02~$1, 301, 159; 03-9839, 205

‘

@ HAWAII
- - Q1+$30,000; 02-$30,000 ©

MISSOURT | - ~

tt

01-$3, 400, 000 NOTE: Council recomended the one year only,
' with decision on subsequent years to

be made following the site visit.
01~$74,532; 02-$36, 0805 03-$36 ,084

2/69.1

i. 2/'69.2

CENIIRAL NEW YORK
2/69.1 = 01-$370,000 (of which $60,000 is to be reserved) 5 02-$372, 3355

-03-$376 ,335
2/69.2 = O1-$178,711; 02-$156,957; 03-$113,009

COLORADOLWYOMING | .

© ° O1-$127 801; 02-$223,312; 03-$242,520

“KANSAS

 

2/69.1 and 2/69.2 = 91-8396,230; 02-$359,269; 03-$361,789; O4-S144 027
 

 

MAIN:

 

== =A 96509 245; 02-$493, 604 5 03-$552 , 865

MEMPHIS.

San $tI9, 9005 02-$26,8845 03-$20,343

METROPOLITAN, D.C.

er tmnt

01-$752,504; 02-$737,604; 03-§739,445

* TENNESSEE MID-SOUTH -

01-$100,832; 02-$38,361; 03-$33,776

TRI-STATE

 

"01-$72,701 (for ten months); 02-$69, 308; 03--$72 , 326
01-$204 ,321 (for ten months )

2/69.1
2/69.2

Wou

WISCONSIN

 

01-$370,080; 02-$275,800; 03-$200,800

FLORIDA

0281 = 01-$163,900; 02-$163,900; 03-$163,900
02S2 = Disapproved

0253 = 01-$163,272; 02-$163,272; 03-$163,272
0284 = 01-$73,172 (eight months) .

First. Operational = 01-$792,2513 02-$686 ,386; 03-$690,879
Operational Supplement = 01-$150,000; 02-$150,000; 03-$150,000. (The
amount is approximate and Council delegates to staff, the setting

© of an exact amount. Commitment should be for three years. )

 

 
 

 

TII. Return for revision under the conditions specified by the
Review Committee ,

Arkansas

IV. Deferral for further review and ‘advise as specified by the
Review Committee

Ohio Valley
South Carolina

V. Disapproval under conditions specified by the Review Committee

New Jersey
eAlbany _

VI. Approval under conditions specified by the Council

California (2/69.1) = Council endorsed the reconrmendations of the
Committee on all components of this application except #28 (A
Comprehensive Stroke Program). In this case they accepted the
recommendations of the site visitors.

01-$556 369; 02-$546,145; and 03-$547 655

(2/69.2) = Endorsed Committee recommendation ($210,000
per month until June 30, 1969) with committed support for two
additional years, in an amount to be set with the advice of site
visitors.

(2/69.4) = Endorsed Committee recommendation - Project 23 -
01-$122 ,050; 02~$127 ,540; and 03-$123,955. Project 22 to be
returned for revision.

Intermountain (2/69.1) = Deferral, pending the development of a
policy governing projects of this kind (see Council minutes)

 

(2/69.2 and 3) = 01-$151,260; 42-$145,451; 03-$269,319;
O4-$265 ,253
 

 

~t6-

Rochester = The: Council endorsed the recomnendations of the Committee ‘
except on project 13. In this case they recommended approval of
the project in the reduced amount recommended by the site visitors,
but that no additional funds be added to the total award to the
region.

 

01-$253,051; 02-$184,164; 03-$190,064

Western Pennsylvania = The Council endorsed the general reconmendations
of the Review Committee with the following specific additions:

 

‘ (a) The amount to be awarded for interim support of the core
(April 1 thru June 30, 1969) is to be based upon an annual
level not in excess of the present level plus $100,000. ~

(b) The amount for continuation of core activities under the
operational grant (July 1, 1969 et seg.) will be set by the
Council when it considers "the entire € operational application
and has the findings of the site visit.

Maryland = The Council was unable to arrive at a reconmendation becausé
~~ of the difference between the recommendations of the site visitors
and the recommendations of the Committee. Authority for final - j
action was delegated to a referee conmittee of three members. A ‘
total award ceiling of $1,445,177 for projects was set. (NOTE: A
report of the findings of the three member conmittee will be ti Ln the
subject of a subsequent _ memo. ),

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 1:00 on February 21, 1969.

I hereby certify that, to. the
best of my knowledge, the fore-
minutes are accurate and complete.

Sihuwoe, aa

Stanley W. Qison, M.D
Director

LCAU UL vies foeremeerees ane

materials which were S dis tributed “at

the meeting are available in the Office
of the Council Secretary.
 

 

. BEENDANUE AT THE NATIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL MEETING
‘February 20-21, 1969

PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE OFFICIALS ATTENDING

Dr. Joseph English, Administrator, HSMHA

Mr. John Francis, Bureau of the Budget

Mr. A.A. Hudgins, Office of Program Plarming & Evaluation, HSMHA
Mr. Irving Lewis, Deputy Administrator, HSMHA

OTHERS ATTENDING

Dr. Lionel Bernstein, Veterans Administration

Dr. J.H.U.Brown, NIG4S

Dr. Wilfred David, Division of Chronic Disease Control
Dr. Lester Evans, Connecticut Regional Medical Program
Dr. Homer Hagedorn, Arthur D. Little

Dr. Ian Mitchell, NCI

Mr. John Pendleton, Division of Chronic Disease Control
Dr. W. L. Ross, Division of Chronic Disease Control
“Miss Pauly Stephan, NCI

Dr. Richard Stephenson, NIH/OD

Mes. Alexandra Walcott, Arthur D. Little

Mr. William J. Zukel, NHI

DRMP STAFF ATTENDING

 

Mr. Nicholas Cavaroechi, Financial Management Officer

Dr. Donald R. Chadwick, Deputy Director, DRMP

Mr. Cleveland Chambliss, Assistant to the Associate Director
for Organizational Liaison Lo

Mr. Edward Friedlander, Assistant Director for Communications and
Public Information

Mr. Charles Hilsenroth, Assistant Director for Management

Dr. Clarence Imbcden, Assistant to the Associate Director for
Organizational Liaison

Mr. Robert Lawton, Consultant to DRMP

Mr. Gregory Lewis, Chief, Grants Management Branch

Dr. Richard Manegold, Associate Director for RMP Operations and Development

Dr. Frank Mark, Chief, Operations Research and Systems Analysis Branch

Mr. Roland Peterson, Assistant Director for Planning and Evaluation

Mrs. Martha Phillips, Associate Director for Grant and Contract Policy

Mrs. Judy Silsbee, Assistant Director for Grants Review

Mr. Robert Thorner, Assistant Director for Health Data

Me. Robert Jones, Chief, Programs Assistance Branch
 

 

DRMP STAFF ATTENDING

 

Miss Rhoda Abrams

Dr. Earl Belue

Miss Joy Finnegan
Mes. Mary V. Geisbert

“Mr. Sam O. Gilmer

Mrs. Sheila Gould

Mr. George Hinkle
Miss Dona Houseal
Miss Margaret Hulbert
Mr. Thomas Kinser

Dr. Anthony Komaroff
Mrs. Lorraine kyttle
Mr. Glenn Lamson

Mrs. Edithye Leventhal
Dr. Hubert Mathewson

Mes. Patricia McDonald
Me. Thomas NeNiff

Mr. Rodney Merker

Mr. John Miers

Miss Majorie Morrill
Miss Leah Resnick

Mr. Richard Russell
Mrs. Rebecca Sadin
Mrs. Jesse Salazar
Dr. Jack Schneider
Miss Susan Simkins

Mr. Alphonse Strachocki
Mr. Lee Teets ,
Mrs. Mary A. Teller
Mr. Frank Van Hee
 

*
~~

ee

 

NATIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ON
REGIONAL MEDICAL PROGRAMS

Michael J. Brennan, M.D. (72)
President, Michigan Cancer Foundation
and Professor of Medicine

“~ Wayne State University

4811 John R Street |
Detroit, Michigan 48201

Edwin L.
Director
American
Chicago,

Crosby, M.D. (71)

Hospital Association
Illinois 60611

Michael E. DeBakey, M.D. (72)
Viee President for Medical
Affairs of Baylor University
Professor and Chairman
Bepartment of Surgery

College of Medicine

Houston, Texes 77025

Bruce W. Everist, M.D. (71)

Chief of Pediatrics

Green Clinic

769 South Vienna Street
_Rustoa, Louisiana 71270

John R. Hogness, M.D. (70)
Dean, School of Medicine
University of Washington
Seattle, Washington 98105

Clark H. Millikan, M.D. (72)
Consultant in Neurology
Mayo Clinic

Rochester, Minnesota 55902

Edmund D. Pellegrino, M.D. (70)

Vice President for the Health Sciences.
Director of the Center

State University of New York

_ Stony Brook, New York 11790

Alfred M. Popma, M.D. (70)
Regional Director - :
Regional Medical Programs
525 West Jefferson Street
Boise, Idaho 83702

Mack I, Shanholtz, M.D. (70)
State Health Commissioner
State Department of Health
Richmond, Virginia 23219

Mr. Curtis Treen (71)

Director

Pension and Insurance Department
United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum,
and Plastic Workers of America
87 S. High Street

Akron, Ohio 44308

Mrs. Florence Wyckoff (72)
243 Corralitos Road
Watsonville, California 95076

- Dr. Joseph T. English, Chairman
Administrator ,
Health Services & Mental
tealth Administration
6600 Rockville Pike
tethesda, Maryland 20014.

ae rN fs

we ee ee wee