1

Introduction

As one of the largest federal science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) funding agencies and employers, the Department of Defense (DoD) plays an essential role in the U.S. science and technology (S&T) ecosystem, in addition to its vital national security responsibilities. DoD’s priorities, as articulated by the Secretary of Defense in March 2021, include defending the nation through innovation and modernization, taking care of the people within DoD by growing civilian and military talent, and reinforcing teamwork with allies and partners (Austin, 2021). The Secretary’s charge is critical in today’s global environment defined by rapid technology change, which reinforces the importance of DoD investment in S&T.

Achieving these priorities relies on advanced S&T capabilities and taking full advantage of the diverse pool of U.S. STEM talent. DoD employs almost one-half of the federal STEM workforce (about 155,000 of 330,000 STEM workers across government) with a substantial portion employed in the defense industry and in defense-sponsored academic research (NSTC, 2021). In recent years, the U.S. military has made marked progress to build a more diverse and inclusive force among junior ranks. In fact, in 2020, more than 31.1 percent of active duty personnel self-identified with “groups in the racial minority” (DoD, 2020b).¹

Also, Black/African American representation is 5 percentage points higher in the active enlisted ranks than in the eligible population (DoD, 2020a). However,

__________________

¹ Racial minority groups from DoD (2020a) include American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African American, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, multi-racial, and other/unknown.

despite this progress, DoD’s broader STEM workforce remains less racially and ethnically diverse than the U.S. general population (DoD, 2020a; NSTC, 2021).

In addition to these workforce considerations, DoD is among the largest federal funders of STEM academic research that is critical to innovation and advancement of the nation’s S&T capabilities. As one of the largest federal S&T funding agencies and employers, DoD plays a critical role in what the National Science Board and others refer to as the S&T ecosystem that undergirds the nation’s global position. To maintain U.S. leadership in the critical years ahead, the National Science Board has called for an expansion of domestic talent reflective of the increasing diversity of the nation (NSB, 2020). While DoD draws on the expertise of both U.S. and international researchers, national security requirements limit many critical areas of the DoD S&T enterprise to U.S. permanent residents and/or citizens, adding an additional urgency to the objective of fully utilizing the capacity and domestic talent at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and other minority institutions (HBCU/MIs) (NRC, 2009).²

HBCU/MIs represent a valuable resource to expand DoD’s government and extramural workforce and S&T enterprise. The more than 400 public and private HBCUs, Tribal Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, and other two- and four-year MIs are positioned to make strong and uniquely important contributions to the defense research enterprise, offering DoD an opportunity to widen its talent pool and diversify STEM research and ultimately strengthen its ability to support national security (Box 1-1).³

In June 2021, President Biden issued Executive Order No. 13985, “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government,” to advance diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility across the federal government.⁴ However, over the past four decades through successive annual National Defense Authorization Acts (NDAAs), Congress has also recognized the need to develop a diverse STEM workforce to support national security needs and has explicitly directed DoD to leverage HBCU/MIs. The fiscal year (FY) 1987 NDAA specified that DoD direct funding to HBCU/MIs.⁵ In

__________________

² For clarity, when referring to S&T in the defense budget, and when referenced in the committee’s work, S&T is defined by three DoD budget activities: basic research, applied research, and advanced technology development.

³ The 2020 NDAA defines “minority institutions” as HBCUs and other institutions of higher education with at least 50 percent minority enrollment. This is in contrast to the more widely known term “minority-serving institutions,” (MSIs), which are either historically defined or enrollment-defined with varying threshold requirements for minority enrollments and institutional expenditures. Thus, MIs are a subset within the larger group of MSIs, and research on MSIs cannot necessarily be applied when focusing on MIs.

⁴ See https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01753/advancing-racial-equity-and-support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-government.

⁵ The current NDAA specified a focus on “minority institutions” (with at least 50 percent minority enrollment) in contrast with earlier NDAAs that specified a focus on “minority-serving institutions” (which generally are designated because of having at least 25 percent minority enrollment). See Box 1-3 for further clarification.

FY 2010 and FY 2016, Congress passed NDAAs that directed DoD to further support HBCU/MIs in developing capacity to conduct defense-related research, development, testing, and evaluation. More recently, the FY 2020 NDAA (Section 229) called for “diversification of the research and engineering workforce of the Department of Defense.” Recognizing that HBCUs and other MIs serve as a critical pathway to ensure development of these skill sets within a diversifying population and to “comprehensively address the national security and defense needs of the United States,” Section 262 of the FY 2020 NDAA required the Secretary of Defense to enter into an agreement with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to conduct a study on the defense research capacity at HBCUs and other MIs.

ABOUT THIS STUDY

In response to the FY 2020 NDAA mandate, in June 2020 DoD requested that the National Academies examine the status of DoD research at HBCUs and MIs, including the methods and means necessary to advance research capacity at these institutions in order to comprehensively address the national security and defense needs of the United States. (See Box 1-2 for an abbreviated statement of task and Appendix A for the full statement of task.) The Board on Higher Education and Workforce therefore convened the Committee on Defense Research at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Other Minority Institutions, selecting members from academia, nonprofit organizations, and industry with expertise in DoD contract and grant processes; research capacity at institutions of higher learning, including HBCUs and MIs; and related areas. (See Appendix B for the committee roster and biographical sketches.)

In response to a congressional request, the committee issued an interim report in August 2021 titled Defense Research at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Other Minority Institutions: Interim Report (NASEM, 2021). It presented preliminary findings related to the methods and means necessary to advance research capacity at HBCU/MIs and serves as a foundation for this more complete effort.

Committee’s Approach to the Task

To address its task, the committee held 10 committee meetings and four public workshops to examine the current landscape of S&T funding and programs across DoD and how the funding and programs relate to HBCU/MIs. (See Appendix C for public meeting agendas.) Information and briefings were collected from representatives from military departments, defense agencies, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Selected leaders from a range of institutions of higher education were asked for opinions on the best practices and challenges in competing for DoD research funding. The committee requested that DoD provide supplemental data on funding support of institutions of higher education,

proposal submission statistics, metrics of success, funding goals, and other relevant data points. Throughout the study, in keeping with its statement of task, the committee focused on S&T fields relevant to DoD needs (e.g., physical and computer sciences, engineering) and on institutional capacity (i.e., rather than on pathways of individual students).

In public workshops, DoD representatives reported on investments in HBCU/MIs, opportunities for institutions of higher education to engage in STEM research and workforce development, and commitments to increasing that engagement. Representatives from institutions of higher education discussed institutional approaches to expanding capacity for their STEM and DoD-related research, barriers to success, and strategies for institutional transitions in the Carnegie classification.

While the public sessions offered valuable information, the committee determined that candid observations from institutions around challenges to expanding research capacity and working with DoD could not be collected in an open forum. Therefore, the committee commissioned a nonprofit research organization, American Institutes for Research, to conduct focus groups with administrators

and faculty at HBCUs and other MIs to collect this information (see additional discussion in Chapter 5).

The committee decided to analyze longitudinal data on DoD investment in HBCU/MI programs over the period FY 2010–2020 but found these data difficult to obtain from DoD sources (a point elaborated upon in Chapter 4). To assist in gathering baseline data, the committee commissioned the Science and Technology Policy Institute, operated by the Institute for Defense Analyses, a nonprofit research corporation. Under the direct oversight of the committee, the Institute for Defense Analyses collected and reviewed publicly available datasets and compiled research reports that provided both quantitative and qualitative data on the types and amounts of DoD funding awarded to institutions of higher education (including HBCU/MIs) and common components of capacity at select DoD-funded institutions.⁶

The committee also reviewed published literature and commissioned two expert opinion papers. The first commissioned paper, by John Rosenthall of the Tougaloo College Research and Development Foundation, focuses on historical and current challenges and successes in stakeholder partnership efforts to build and expand research capacity at HBCU/MIs (Rosenthall, 2021). The second, by Victor McCrary of the University of the District of Columbia, summarizes the current capacity of HBCUs to develop, protect, and commercialize intellectual property created through defense-related research (McCrary, 2021).⁷ The committee also examined previous National Academies work aimed at increasing minority participation in STEM as a resource for improving diversity at DoD. These studies documented the important role that HBCUs and MIs play in expanding the domestic population of scientists and engineers, but found that DoD has not made full use of this opportunity. For example, a 2014 study focusing on Army research laboratories commended their programs to support STEM capabilities at HBCUs and MIs, but found that the lack of written directives, policies, and a strategic plan had limited their potential impact (NRC, 2014). More broadly, a 2019 report by the National Academies reinforced that minority-serving institutions represent an “underutilized resource” to tap into talent because they educate a high portion of the nation’s S&T students of color, and there is a need to enhance the clarity, transparency, and accountability for all federal investments in STEM education and research at these institutions (NASEM, 2019).⁸ In sum, the committee was limited by a lack of peer-reviewed literature on this subject and therefore relied heavily on commissioned analyses by the Institute for Defense

__________________

⁶ The commissioned dataset can be accessed via the study’s public access file upon request.

⁷ The commissioned papers for this study are available at https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-serving-institutions.

⁸ As defined by the Department of Education, students of color are those who identify as Black, Latinx, Asian, Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, or of two or more races (Department of Education, 2021).

Analyses, the focus group research with HBCU/MIs overseen by the American Institutes for Research, and the two commissioned papers.

Finally, to structure and coordinate its work, the committee agreed upon a guiding framework and key definitions related to capacity and related concepts, as shown in Figure 1-1 and discussed in more detail in Box 1-3.

Study Scope and Data Limitations

When taken as a whole, the statement of task was quite extensive. In consideration of the study’s agreed-upon timeline, committee expertise, and the limitations in the available data, the study was scoped across three key areas of focus: elements of institutional capacity, categories of HBCU/MIs, and areas of DoD funding.

Elements of Institutional Capacity

Arriving at a clear understanding and assessment of institutional capacity was the core element of the committee’s study charge. Unfortunately, the committee was unable to identify or obtain a DoD-issued definition of the term “capacity.” Therefore, based on its review of the qualitative and quantitative data, the committee developed its own organizing principle of institutional capacity and used it as a framework to guide its study approach, data collection and analyses, and development of its conclusions and recommendations.

As an organizing principle, the committee determined that institutional capacity to conduct DoD-related research consists of three mutually enforcing areas (Figure 1-1; see also elaboration on this framework in Chapter 5):

• A strong institutional research and contract base, including appropriate physical research facilities and skilled research support to enable competitiveness
• Research faculty support, including an articulated vision and support for a research climate and culture by institutional leadership, faculty teaching workloads that allow time for research pursuits, and department/college-based research staff and administrative support
• Ancillary services, including effective human resources processes, legal/contracting assistance, and robust government relations teams

These three areas are necessary for an institution of higher education to most effectively compete for DoD research funding, successfully carry out the work that is funded, and position itself to build on that success to compete for

additional awards in the future.⁹ Ultimately, the quality of a research project depends on the talents of a principal investigator and their students. But without this infrastructure, HBCU/MIs are less competitive, and, as a result, DoD is not able to take full advantage of talented investigators who might otherwise provide valuable human capital for its research needs. See Chapter 5 for a detailed discussion of each of the three areas.

Categories of HBCU/MIs

One of the strengths of the higher education landscape in the United States is the tremendous variety of its more than 5,000 institutions: public and private, four-year and two-year, and different sizes, areas of focus, and other characteristics. As described more fully in Chapter 2, this variety is reflected in the more than 400 HBCUs and other MIs across all U.S. states and territories.

A standard way to characterize institutions of higher education is through the Carnegie classification, which categorizes U.S. colleges and universities into seven groups: doctoral universities, master’s colleges and universities, baccalaureate

__________________

⁹ The committee’s framework suggests there are three overarching areas to support the capacity to conduct DoD-related research. The committee notes other factors or indicators specific to each program announcement or solicitation that could be considered in assessing institutional research capacity.

colleges, baccalaureate/associate’s colleges, associate’s colleges, special focus institutions, and Tribal Colleges and Universities.¹⁰ Of the 469 doctoral universities in the United States, less than 10 percent are HBCU/MIs, and, of those, only three are R1 (defined as doctoral institutions with very high research activity). The majority of four-year HBCU/MIs are master’s colleges and universities or baccalaureate colleges (similar to most non-HBCU/MIs, also referred to as majority institutions or predominately white institutions). Nearly 200 HBCU/MIs are two-year institutions. (For the full list of HBCUs and MIs, see Appendix D.)

The committee developed two complementary approaches to identify the role that HBCU/MIs can play in competing for DoD research and preparing STEM students of color for DoD-relevant graduate study—whether at the same school, another HBCU/MI, or a non-HBCU/MI. First, the committee generally limited its in-depth data analysis to HBCU/MIs that are already desirable, capable, and/or stand at the cusp of engaging in DoD-related research. (For a fuller explanation, see Chapter 4.) The committee believes that this subset of institutions provides a reasonably representative picture of the current issues facing a majority of HBCU/MIs that want to increase their DoD-related research. Second, to explore the potential contribution of HBCU/MIs that are less active in research, the committee developed a research spectrum of HBCU/MIs: ranging from undergraduate-centric institutions with little experience in sponsored research, to those that are “research engaged” and conduct limited grant-funded research, to those that are “research active” or are “highly research active.” (For a fuller explanation of this spectrum, see Chapter 2.)

DoD Investments

DoD’s annual budget request to Congress for all DoD operations and investments is organized into five appropriation categories: operations and maintenance; procurement; research, development, test, and evaluation; military personnel; and military construction. Historically, the combination of appropriations for the first three sub-activities for research, development, test, and evaluation (6.1 basic research, 6.2 applied research, and 6.3 advanced technology development) are referred to as “science and technology (S&T).” The scope of this study was set to the S&T budget activities by the National Academies and the Office of the Secretary of Defense sponsor. This is a sensible boundary since nearly all opportunities for institutions of higher education to gain support from DoD’s research, development, test, and evaluation category are found within these three areas. The exceptions—such as some student internship programs sponsored by defense research and development centers, and contracts/partnerships with university-affiliated research centers—are highlighted when discussed throughout

__________________

¹⁰ For information on how institutions fit within the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, see https://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/downloads.php. More information is also provided in this report in Chapter 2 and Appendix D.

the report. Important to the committee in considering recommendations to enhance HBCU/MI capacity is that the defense S&T funding account is very small and is not keeping up with inflation. The funding that academia is most likely to competitively gain, the 6.1 basic research account, was appropriated only $2.6 billion in FY 2020, just 0.4 percent of the total defense budget.

The committee encountered several difficulties that limited its ability to provide a complete and thorough analysis of DoD investments in HBCU/MIs during the selected period of FY 2010–2020. Two of the most salient difficulties were (1) the variation in the level of funding details available across the Office of the Secretary of Defense, military departments, and defense agencies; and (2) incomplete data on proposal funding success rates by HBCU/MIs in programs targeted for them and in open competitions. Neither recent nor longitudinal data

were uniformly available about HBCU/MI proposal rates, selection rates, or feedback on non-selection.

ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT

The remainder of this report discusses how DoD can enhance research capacity at HBCU/MIs:

• Chapter 2 provides an overview of HBCUs, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, and Tribal Colleges and Universities; the spectrum of their research capacity; and their contributions to the U.S. STEM workforce.

• DoD investments in STEM research at institutions of higher education are discussed in Chapter 3, including an overview of the agency’s priorities, programs, funding models, and partnership opportunities.
• Chapter 4 draws on the committee’s data collection efforts to compare current DoD research funding for HBCU/MIs with funding for other institutions, as well as the institutions’ current infrastructure and capacity to conduct research and for commercialization.
• Promising practices for securing and sustaining DoD funding, along with HBCU/MIs’ successes and the barriers they experience to adopting these practices, are described in Chapter 5.
• Chapter 6 presents the committee’s overall research conclusions and recommendations to enhance the capacity of HBCU/MIs in DoD-related research.

In keeping with the committee’s statement of task and to serve as a reference to readers, an extensive set of appendixes is also included.

REFERENCES

NSB (National Science Board). 2020. National Science Board vision 2030. Alexandria, VA. https://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2020/nsb202015.pdf.

NSTC (National Science and Technology Council). 2021. Best practices for diversity and inclusion in STEM education and research: A guide by and for federal agencies. Washington, DC. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/091621-Best-Practices-for-Diversity-Inclusion-in-STEM.pdf?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=83268b01-a660-4507-8e26-3120d3bdf70b.

PRC (Pew Research Center). 2021. STEM jobs see uneven progress in increasing gender, racial and ethnic diversity. Washington, DC. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/04/01/stem-jobs-see-uneven-progress-in-increasing-gender-racial-and-ethnic-diversity/.

Rosenthall, J. 2021. Enhancing Department of Defense engagements with historically black colleges and universities and other minority serving institutions. Paper commissioned by the Committee on Defense Research at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Other Minority Serving Institutions. https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/defense-research-at-historically-black-colleges-and-universities-and-other-minority-serving-institutions.

This page intentionally left blank.