Public Health Service Agencies:
Overview and Funding
Amalia K. Corby-Edwards, Coordinator
Analyst in Public Health and Epidemiology
C. Stephen Redhead, Coordinator
Specialist in Health Policy
November 12, 2013
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R43304
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Summary
Within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), eight agencies are designated
components of the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS): (1) the Agency for Healthcare Research and
Quality (AHRQ), (2) the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), (3) the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), (4) the Food and Drug Administration (FDA),
(5) the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), (6) the Indian Health Service
(IHS), (7) the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and (8) the Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). This report gives a brief overview of each agency
and summarizes its funding for FY2010 through FY2013, as well as its FY2014 budget request.
The total amount of funding available to the agencies (i.e., total program level) includes
discretionary budget authority provided in annual appropriations acts—plus additional funding
from other sources, including user fees and collections from third-party payers—and mandatory
funding. Mandatory funding for PHS agencies is provided in laws other than annual
appropriations acts, notably the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA, P.L. 111-148).
Five of the PHS agencies are funded through the Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Education (Labor-HHS-ED) appropriations act, and those agencies are subject to the PHS
Program Evaluation Set-Aside. Set-aside funds are distributed to evaluate program
implementation and effectiveness based on amounts approved by appropriators.
AHRQ and NIH are primarily research agencies. AHRQ conducts and supports health services
research to improve the quality of health care. NIH conducts and supports basic, clinical, and
translational biomedical and behavioral research. Three PHS agencies—IHS, HRSA, and
SAMHSA—provide health care services or help fund systems that do so. IHS supports a health
care delivery system for American Indians and Alaska Natives. HRSA funds programs and
systems to improve access to health care among the uninsured and medically underserved.
SAMHSA funds mental health and substance abuse prevention and treatment services. CDC and
ATSDR coordinate and support a variety of population-based programs to prevent and control
disease, injury, and disability. FDA regulates drugs, medical devices, food, dietary supplements,
and tobacco products.
In 2011, Congress and the President enacted the Budget Control Act (BCA, P.L. 112-25) in
response to concerns about the growth in the federal deficit. The BCA established limits on
overall discretionary spending and triggered annual across-the-board spending reductions—a
process known as sequestration—beginning in FY2013. These deficit-reduction measures have
also affected PHS agency discretionary and mandatory funding. For FY2013, each agency’s post-
sequester total program level funding was as follows:
• AHRQ, which is funded by PHS set-aside and mandatory transfers: $429 million,
which is $24 million (5.9%) above the FY2012 amount.
• NIH, which is almost entirely funded by discretionary appropriations: $29.151
billion, which is $1.709 billion (5.5%) below the FY2012 amount.
• IHS, which is funded by a combination of discretionary appropriations,
mandatory appropriations, and collections: $5.258 billion, which is $160 million
(3.0%) below the FY2012 amount.
Congressional Research Service
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
• HRSA, which is funded by a combination of discretionary appropriations, ACA
mandatory appropriations, PHS set-aside funds, and user fees: $8.1 billion, which
is $105 million (1.3%) below the FY2012 amount.
• SAMHSA, which is funded largely by discretionary appropriations, also receives
some PHS evaluation funds: $3.355 billion, which is $214 million (6.0%) below
the FY2012 level.
• CDC (including ATSDR), which is funded by a combination of discretionary
appropriations and mandatory appropriations: $10.258 billion, which is $935
million (8.4%) below the FY2012 level.
• FDA receives an increasing proportion of its funding from industry user fees, and
also receives discretionary appropriations: $4.031 billion, which is $199 million
(5.1%) above the FY2012 amount.
Congressional Research Service
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Overview of PHS Agency Funding ................................................................................................. 2
PHS Program Evaluation Set-Aside .......................................................................................... 3
Supplemental Appropriations .................................................................................................... 4
Mandatory Appropriations ......................................................................................................... 4
User Fees ................................................................................................................................... 5
Collections ................................................................................................................................. 6
Transfer Authority ..................................................................................................................... 6
PHS Agency Funding: FY2010-FY2013 ......................................................................................... 6
Discretionary Spending Limits and Sequestration .................................................................... 7
Report Outline ................................................................................................................................. 9
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) ................................................................. 10
Agency Overview .................................................................................................................... 10
FY2010-FY2013 Funding ....................................................................................................... 11
FY2014 President’s Budget Request ....................................................................................... 12
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) ...................................................................... 13
Agency Overview .................................................................................................................... 13
FY2010-FY2013 Funding ....................................................................................................... 14
FY2014 President’s Budget Request ....................................................................................... 15
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ........................................................................................... 18
Agency Overview .................................................................................................................... 18
FY2010-FY2013 Funding ....................................................................................................... 19
FY2014 President’s Budget Request ....................................................................................... 20
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) ............................................................... 23
Agency Overview .................................................................................................................... 23
FY2010-FY2013 Funding ....................................................................................................... 24
FY2014 President’s Budget Request ....................................................................................... 25
Indian Health Service (IHS) .......................................................................................................... 29
Agency Overview .................................................................................................................... 29
FY2010-FY2013 Funding ....................................................................................................... 30
FY2014 President’s Budget Request ....................................................................................... 31
National Institutes of Health (NIH) ............................................................................................... 34
Agency Overview .................................................................................................................... 34
FY2010-FY2013 Funding ....................................................................................................... 35
FY2014 President’s Budget Request ....................................................................................... 35
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) .................................. 38
Agency Overview .................................................................................................................... 38
FY2010-FY2013 Funding ....................................................................................................... 39
FY2014 President’s Budget Request ....................................................................................... 39
Congressional Research Service
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Figures
Figure C-1. Funding for CDC Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion,
FY2008-FY2014 ......................................................................................................................... 48
Tables
Table 1. Impact of BCA Annual Spending Reductions on PHS Agency Funding ........................... 9
Table 2. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) ................................................... 12
Table 3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)................................................................................ 15
Table 4. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ............................................................................. 21
Table 5. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) ................................................. 26
Table 6. Indian Health Service (IHS) ............................................................................................. 32
Table 7. National Institutes of Health (NIH) ................................................................................. 36
Table 8. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) .................... 40
Table B-1. Community Health Center Fund, FY2011-FY2015 ..................................................... 43
Table C-1. PPHF Appropriations Under ACA and Current Law ................................................... 44
Table C-2. PPHF Transfers to HHS Agencies, FY2010-FY2014 .................................................. 45
Table D-1. PCORTF Distribution, FY2010-FY2014 ..................................................................... 49
Table E-1. FDA User Fee Authorizations and FY2013 Amounts .................................................. 50
Appendixes
Appendix A. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA): FY2009 Supplemental
Appropriations ............................................................................................................................ 42
Appendix B. Community Health Center Fund .............................................................................. 43
Appendix C. Prevention and Public Health Fund (PPHF) ............................................................. 44
Appendix D. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund .................................................... 49
Appendix E. FDA User Fee Authorizations ................................................................................... 50
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 51
Congressional Research Service
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Introduction
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has designated eight of its 11 operating
divisions (agencies) as components of the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS). The PHS agencies
are: (1) the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), (2) the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), (3) the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC), (4) the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), (5) the Health Resources and Services
Administration (HRSA), (6) the Indian Health Service (IHS), (7) the National Institutes of Health
(NIH), and (8) the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).1
Collectively, the PHS agencies provide and support essential public health services. Individually,
the missions of the PHS agencies vary. With the exception of FDA, the agencies have limited
regulatory responsibilities. Two of them, NIH and AHRQ, are primarily research agencies. NIH
conducts and supports basic, clinical, and translational medical research. AHRQ conducts and
supports research on the quality and effectiveness of health care services and systems.
Three of the other agencies—IHS, HRSA, and SAMHSA—provide health care services or help
support systems that deliver such services. IHS supports a health care delivery system for
American Indians and Alaska Natives. Health services are provided directly by the IHS, as well
as through tribally contracted and operated health programs, and through services purchased from
private providers. HRSA funds programs and systems to improve access to health care among
low-income populations, pregnant women and children, persons living with HIV/AIDS, rural and
frontier populations, and others who are medically underserved. SAMHSA funds community-
based mental health and substance abuse prevention and treatment services.
CDC is a public health agency that develops and supports community-based and population-wide
programs and systems, such as disease surveillance and education programs, for a full spectrum
of acute and chronic diseases and injuries, including public health emergencies and bioterrorism.
ATSDR, headed by the CDC director, is tasked with identifying potential public health effects
from exposure to hazardous substances. Finally, FDA is primarily a regulatory agency, whose
mission is to ensure the safety of foods, dietary supplements, and cosmetics, and the safety and
effectiveness of drugs, vaccines, medical devices, and other health products.
The programs and activities of five of the PHS agencies—AHRQ, CDC, HRSA, NIH, and
SAMHSA—are mostly authorized under the Public Health Service Act (PHSA).2 While some of
FDA’s regulatory activities are also authorized under the PHSA, the agency and its programs
largely derive their statutory authority from the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
1 HHS also includes three human services agencies that are not part of the Public Health Service: (1) the Administration
for Children and Families (ACF); (2) the Administration for Community Living (ACL), which was created in April
2012 by consolidating the Administration on Aging (AoA), the HHS Office on Disability, and ACF’s Administration
on Developmental Disability; and (3) the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Departmental leadership
is provided by the Office of the Secretary, which is comprised of various subdivisions including the Assistant Secretary
for Preparedness and Response (ASPR), the Assistant Secretary for Health (ASH), the Office of the Surgeon General,
the Office for Civil Rights (OCR), the Office of the Inspector General (OIG), and the Office of the National
Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC). For more information on HHS and links to the PHS agency
websites, see http://www.hhs.gov/.
2 42 U.S.C. §§201 et seq.
Congressional Research Service
1
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
(FFDCA).3 HRSA’s maternal and child health programs are authorized in the Social Security Act
(SSA);4 and many of the IHS programs and services are authorized by the Indian Health Care
Improvement Act.5 ATSDR was created by the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA, the “Superfund” law).6
Overview of PHS Agency Funding
The main source of funding for each PHS agency is the discretionary budget authority it receives
through the annual appropriations process.7 AHRQ, CDC, HRSA, NIH, and SAMHSA are funded
through the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies
(Labor-HHS-ED) appropriations act. Funding for ATSDR and IHS is provided through the
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies (Interior/Environment)
appropriations act. FDA gets its funding through the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and
Drug Administration, and Related Agencies (Agriculture) appropriations act.8
In addition to the discretionary funding that is provided by the annual appropriations acts, PHS
agencies may also receive funds from the PHS Program Evaluation Set-Aside, mandatory
appropriations, supplemental appropriations, user fees, and collections from third-party payers.
As discussed briefly below, and in more detail in the relevant sections later in the report, these
additional sources of funding are a substantial component of the budget of several PHS agencies.
PHS Agency FY2013 Funding At-a-Glance
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
For FY2013, AHRQ’s post-sequester program level is $429 million, which is $24 million (5.9%) above the FY2012
amount. See Table 2.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
(ATSDR)
For FY2013, CDC’s post-sequester discretionary budget authority (including ATSDR) is $5.509 billion, within its total
program level of $10.258 billion. Relative to FY2012, CDC/ATSDR’s discretionary budget authority decreased by
3.9% and overal program level decreased by 8.4%. See Table 3.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
For FY2013, FDA’s post-sequester program level is $4.031 billion, which includes $2.386 billion in discretionary
funding and $1.645 billion in user fees. Relative to FY2012, these amounts represent a 4.8% decrease in discretionary
3 21 U.S.C. §§301 et seq.
4 SSA Title V, 42 U.S.C. §§701 et seq.
5 25 U.S.C. §§1601 et seq.
6 42 U.S.C. §9604(i).
7 Budget authority is the authority provided in federal law to incur financial obligations that will result in immediate or
future expenditures, or outlays, of federal funds. Such obligations include contracts for the purchase of supplies and
services, liabilities for salaries and wages, and awarding grants. Appropriations are the most common form of budget
authority. Discretionary budget authority represents funding that is provided in and controlled by the annual
appropriations acts.
8 For an overview of each of these three appropriations acts, see CRS Report CRS Report R43236, Labor, Health and
Human Services, and Education (L-HHS-ED): FY2014 Appropriations, coordinated by Karen E. Lynch; CRS Report
R42525, Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2013 Appropriations, coordinated by Carol Hardy Vincent;
and CRS Report R42596, Agriculture and Related Agencies: FY2013 Appropriations, by Jim Monke.
Congressional Research Service
2
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
budget authority and a 24.0% increase in user fees. See Table 4.
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)
For FY2013, HRSA’s post-sequester discretionary budget authority is $5.863 billion, within its total program level of
$8.100 billion. Relative to FY2012, HRSA’s discretionary budget authority decreased by 5.7%, and its total program
level decreased by 1.3%. See Table 5.
Indian Health Service (IHS)
For FY2013, IHS’s post-sequester discretionary budget authority is $4.131 billion, within its program level funding of
$5.258 billion. Relative to FY2012, IHS’s discretionary budget authority decreased by 4.1%, and its total program level
decreased by 3.0%. See Table 6.
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
For FY2013, NIH’s post-sequester program level is $29.151 billion, within its discretionary budget authority of
$29.001 billion. Relative to FY2012, both NIH’s program level and discretionary budget authority decreased by 5.5%.
See Table 7.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
For FY2013, SAMHSA’s post-sequester program level is $3.355 billion, within its discretionary budget authority of
$3.211 billion. Relative to FY2012, SAMHSA’s program level decreased by 6.0% and its discretionary budget authority
decreased by 4.1%. See Table 8.
PHS Program Evaluation Set-Aside
The five PHS agencies funded through the Labor-HHS-ED appropriations act are subject to the
PHS Program Evaluation Set-Aside (“set-aside”), which is a unique feature of HHS
appropriations, authorized by Section 241 of the PHSA. This provision authorizes the HHS
Secretary, with the approval of appropriators, to use a portion of the funds appropriated for PHSA
programs to evaluate their implementation and effectiveness. Under this authority, the
appropriations of a number of HHS agencies and offices are subject to a budget “tap.” The tapped
funds are redistributed within the department for evaluation and other specific purposes. Although
the PHSA limits the set-aside to no more than 1% of program appropriations, in recent years the
annual Labor-HHS-ED appropriations act has specified a higher maximum amount of set-aside
funds. The FY2012 Labor-HHS-ED appropriations act capped the set-aside at 2.5%,9 an amount
that was continued in FY2013 by the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act.10 For FY2014, the
President’s budget proposes increasing the set-aside to 3.0%.
Following passage of the annual Labor-HHS-ED appropriations act, the HHS Budget Office
calculates the amount of set-aside funds to be tapped from the various donor agencies and offices.
It then allocates those funds to recipient agencies and programs, including offices within the
Office of the Secretary, based on the amounts specified in the appropriations act.11 In FY2012,
four PHS agencies—CDC, HRSA, NIH, and SAMHSA—together donated almost all (98%) of
the set-aside funds.12 These agencies also were recipients of set-aside funds. A fifth PHS
9 P.L. 112-74, Division F, Section 205, 125 Stat. 1082.
10 P.L. 113-6, Division F, 127 Stat. 412.
11 For further details, see Chapter I of HHS, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, “Evaluation:
Performance Improvement 2009,” Washington, DC, 2010, pp. 6-8, http://aspe.hhs.gov/pic/perfimp/2009/report.pdf.
12 HHS, “Use of Public Health Service Set-Aside Authority for Fiscal Year 2012, Report to Congress.” Most of the
funds appropriated for CDC, HRSA, NIH, and SAMHSA are subject to the PHS evaluation tap. Exceptions, by HHS
convention, normally include funds appropriated for certain block grants administered by those agencies (targeting
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
3
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
agency—AHRQ—is also an important recipient of funding. In recent years, AHRQ has not
received a discretionary appropriation and has been largely supported by the set-aside funds and
other transfers it receives (see Table 2).
Supplemental Appropriations
In February 2009, the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (Recovery Act, or ARRA)
provided $15.100 billion in supplemental FY2009 discretionary appropriations to the five PHS
agencies that receive annual discretionary appropriations through the Labor-HHS-ED
appropriations act.13 Details of the allocation of those funds are provided in Appendix A. Almost
all of the ARRA appropriations were designated as two-year funds, available for obligation
through the end of FY2010.
Mandatory Appropriations
Although the bulk of PHS agency funding is provided by discretionary appropriations, agencies
also receive mandatory funding from other sources.14 The Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act (ACA)15 included numerous provisions financed with appropriations that provide billions of
dollars of mandatory (or direct) spending to support new and existing grant programs and other
activities.16
Several of those ACA provisions appropriated funds for specified programs and activities within
the PHS agencies. These appropriations are itemized and included in the funding tables later in
this report. ACA also established three multibillion dollar trust funds to support programs and
activities within the PHS agencies (see text box).
(...continued)
prevention, substance abuse, and mental health), for program management activities, and for buildings and facilities. It
also includes funds appropriated for some programs not authorized by the PHSA, such as HRSA’s maternal and child
health block grant.
13 P.L. 111-5, 123 Stat. 115. The PHS agency appropriations were included in Title VIII (Labor-HHS-ED) of Division
A of ARRA. In addition to these discretionary appropriations, ARRA included several HHS mandatory spending
provisions. For example, ARRA temporarily increased federal payments to states under the Medicaid and the
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) programs. ARRA also incorporated the Health Information
Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act, which established multibillion dollar incentive programs
under Medicare and Medicaid to encourage hospitals and physicians to adopt and use interoperable electronic health
record technology. For more information, see CRS Report R40537, American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
(P.L. 111-5): Summary and Legislative History, by Clinton T. Brass et al.
14 Mandatory spending, also known as direct spending, refers to outlays from budget authority that is provided in laws
other than annual appropriations acts. Mandatory spending includes spending on entitlement programs.
15 ACA was signed into law on March 23, 2010 (P.L. 111-148, 124 Stat. 119). On March 30, 2010, the President signed
the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (HCERA; P.L. 111-152, 124 Stat. 1029), which amended multiple
health care and revenue provisions in ACA. A number of other subsequently enacted laws have made more targeted
changes to specific ACA provisions. All references to ACA in this report refer to the law as amended.
16 For a complete list and discussion of all the appropriations in ACA, including details of the obligation of these funds,
see CRS Report R41301, Appropriations and Fund Transfers in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA),
by C. Stephen Redhead.
Congressional Research Service
4
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Trust Funds Established in the Affordable Care Act
The Community Health Center Fund (CHCF), for which ACA provided a total of $11.000 bil ion in annual
appropriations over the five-year period FY2011-FY2015, is helping support the federal health center program and
the National Health Service Corps (NHSC), both administered by HRSA.17 The contribution of CHCF funds to
HRSA’s budget is discussed in more detail in the HRSA section of this report. A table summarizing each fiscal year’s
CHCF appropriation and the al ocation of funds appears in Appendix B.
The Prevention and Public Health Fund (PPHF), for which ACA provided a permanent annual appropriation, is
intended to support prevention, wellness, and other public health programs and activities.18 The Middle Class Tax
Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 reduced ACA’s annual appropriations to the PPHF over the period FY2013-
FY2021 by a total of $6.250 billion.19 To date, CDC has received the majority of PPHF funds, while AHRQ, HRSA,
and SAMHSA have received smal er amounts. In FY2013, almost half of the PPHF funds were transferred by the
Secretary of HHS to CMS to support ACA implementation. The contribution of PPHF funds to CDC’s budget is
discussed in more detail in the CDC section of this report. A broader analysis of the allocation of PPHF funding is
provided in Appendix C.
The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund (PCORTF) is supporting comparative effectiveness
research over a 10-year period (FY2010-FY2019) with a mix of appropriations, some of which are offset by revenue
from a fee imposed on health plans, and transfers from the Medicare Part A and Part B trust funds.20 A portion of the
PCORTF is allocated for AHRQ. More information on the PCORTF, including the appropriation and transfer
formulas, is provided in Appendix D.
HRSA, CDC, and IHS receive mandatory funds from other sources as well. Family-to-Family
Health Information Centers at HRSA have been funded by a series of mandatory appropriations
since FY2007. CDC receives Medicaid funding to support the Vaccines for Children program.
Both IHS and NIH receive mandatory funds for diabetes programs. These and other mandatory
appropriations are reflected in the agency-specific tables in this report.
User Fees
Several PHS agencies assess user fees on third parties to help fund their programs and activities.
User fees collected by CDC, HRSA, and SAMHSA represent a relatively small portion of each
agency’s overall budget.21 In comparison, the user fees that FDA collects help finance a broad
range of the agency’s regulatory activities and account for a substantial and growing percentage
of the agency’s budget. It has been 20 years since the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA)22
established the first user fee program at FDA. Since PDUFA’s enactment, Congress has
established several other FDA user fee programs. These programs were created to provide FDA
with additional resources that allow it to hire more personnel and expedite the process of
reviewing and approving new product applications. User fees also support information
technology infrastructure. FDA’s user fee programs now support the agency’s regulation of
prescription drugs, animal drugs, medical devices, and tobacco products, among other activities.
The amount of user fees that FDA collects under these programs has increased steadily since
PDUFA, both in absolute terms and as a share of FDA’s overall budget. For FY2013, user fees
17 ACA Section 10503(a)-(b).
18 ACA Section 4002.
19 P.L. 112-96, Section 3205, 126 Stat. 194.
20 ACA Section 6301(d)-(e).
21 Details on user fees for CDC, HRSA, and SAMHSA are provided in the respective agency-specific sections in this
report.
22 P.L. 102-571.
Congressional Research Service
5
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
accounted for almost 41% of the FDA overall budget. More discussion of user fees is provided in
the FDA section and in Appendix E of this report.
Collections
IHS supplements its discretionary appropriations with third-party collections from public and
private payers. Most of these funds come from Medicare and Medicaid, which reimburse IHS for
services provided to American Indians and Alaska Natives enrolled in these programs at facilities
operated by the IHS and tribes. IHS also collects reimbursements from private health insurers.
IHS collections (and reimbursements) are reflected in Table 6 of this report.
Transfer Authority
In addition to the funding mechanisms described above, agencies may gain or lose funding
through the transfer of budget authority from one appropriations account to another. Generally,
budget authority may be transferred between accounts only as specifically authorized by law. A
provision in the annual L-HHS-ED appropriations act gives the HHS Secretary the authority to
transfer up to 1% of the funds in any given account. However, the transfer authority stipulates
that a recipient account may not be increased by more than 3%. It also requires that congressional
appropriators be notified in advance of any transfer.23
The HHS Secretary has made extensive use of this transfer authority in FY2013 as part of a
broader effort to provide CMS with funding to implement ACA.24 NIH was the primary source of
the funds transferred in FY2013, while among the PHS agencies, CDC, HRSA, and SAMHSA
were recipients of those transfers.
PHS Agency Funding: FY2010-FY2013
Since FY2010, Congress has taken a number of steps through the annual appropriations process
and the enactment of deficit-reduction legislation to reduce federal discretionary spending.
Lawmakers agreed to cuts in discretionary spending for a broad range of agencies and programs
as part of negotiations to complete the FY2011 appropriations process and avert a government
shutdown. In the following two appropriations cycles—FY2012 and FY2013—Congress further
reduced funding for many appropriations accounts (see text box). These actions have had a
significant impact on PHS agency funding.
Labor-HHS-ED Annual Appropriations (FY2011-FY2013)
FY2011
Title VIII of the Ful -Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (P.L. 112-10, Division B) provided Labor-HHS-ED
funding general y at FY2010 levels, but with numerous spending reductions for specified agencies and programs. P.L.
23 The HHS Secretary’s transfer authority was included as Section 206 of the FY2012 Labor-HHS-ED appropriations
act (P.L. 112-74, Division F). It remained in effect for FY2013 under the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act,
2013 (P.L. 113-6, Division F).
24 For more discussion of ACA implementation funding, see CRS Report R42051, Budget Control Act: Potential
Impact of Sequestration on Health Reform Spending, by C. Stephen Redhead.
Congressional Research Service
6
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
112-10 also applied a 0.2% across-the-board rescission to al accounts (including Labor-HHS-ED) with the exception
of the Department of Defense and certain funds related to the global war on terrorism or designated as emergency.
FY2012
Division F of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 (P.L. 112-74) provided regular appropriations for Labor-
HHS-ED for FY2012. P.L. 112-74 also applied a 0.189% across-the-board rescission to al Labor-HHS-ED
appropriations accounts. FY2012 funding levels for the PHS agencies that receive discretionary funding through the
Labor-HHS-ED appropriations act general y were below FY2011 amounts.
FY2013
Title V of the Ful -Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L. 113-6, Division F) provided Labor-HHS-ED funding
generally at FY2012 levels, but with some spending adjustments—reductions and increases—for specified programs.
Pursuant to Sec. 3004 in Division G of P.L. 113-6, the Office of Management and Budget applied a 0.2% across-the-
board rescission to al nonsecurity appropriations accounts, including Labor-HHS-ED.
In 2011, Congress and the President enacted the Budget Control Act (BCA)25 in response to
concerns about the growth in the federal deficit. The BCA established limits on overall
discretionary spending and triggered annual across-the-board spending reductions—a process
known as sequestration—beginning in FY2013. These deficit-reduction measures have also
affected PHS agency discretionary and mandatory funding.
Discretionary Spending Limits and Sequestration26
The BCA amended the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act (BBEDCA, P.L. 99-
177) by establishing two budget enforcement mechanisms to reduce the federal deficit over the
10-year period FY2012 through FY2021 by at least $2.1 trillion. First, the BCA established
enforceable limits, or caps, on discretionary spending for each of FY2012 through FY2021. The
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that adhering to the discretionary spending caps,
which grow by approximately 2% each year, would reduce federal spending by about $0.9 trillion
over that period, compared to the projected level of spending if annual discretionary
appropriations were to grow at the rate of inflation.
Second, the BCA created a Joint Committee on Deficit Reduction (Joint Committee) and
instructed it to develop legislation to reduce the federal deficit. The law gave Congress and the
President until January 15, 2012, to enact a Joint Committee bill to reduce the federal deficit by
an amount greater than $1.2 trillion over the period FY2012-FY2021. If Congress and the
President failed to meet that deadline then automatic annual spending reductions would be
triggered for each of FY2013 through FY2021. The spending reductions would be achieved
through a combination of sequestration (i.e., an across-the-board cancellation of budgetary
resources) and lowering the BCA-imposed discretionary spending caps.
On November 21, 2012, the co-chairs of the Joint Committee announced that the group had been
unable to reach agreement on a legislative proposal to cut the deficit and would not be submitting
a bill to Congress. Thus, on March 1, 2013, the President ordered the FY2013 spending
reductions, pursuant to the BBEDCA, as amended by the BCA. The FY2013 sequestration order
was the first of a series of automatic annual spending reductions under the BCA that are required
25 P.L. 112-25, 125 Stat. 240.
26 This section of the report is drawn largely from CRS Report R42051, Budget Control Act: Potential Impact of
Sequestration on Health Reform Spending, by C. Stephen Redhead.
Congressional Research Service
7
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
each fiscal year through FY2021. On April 10, 2013, the day the President released the FY2014
budget, he ordered the FY2014 spending reductions.
The law specifies that each year’s spending reductions must cut a total of $109.333 billion from
nonexempt budget accounts. That amount is equally divided between defense and nondefense
spending, each of which is subject to a $54.667 billion annual cut. PHS agency spending belongs
in the nondefense category. Importantly, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA)
reduced the FY2013 cuts by $24 billion, which means that both defense and nondefense spending
were subject to $12 billion less in cuts in FY2013 (i.e., $42.667 billion, instead of $54.667
billion). The annual spending reductions in each spending category—defense and nondefense—
are further divided proportionately between discretionary spending and nonexempt mandatory
(i.e., direct) spending.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is responsible for calculating the percentages and
amounts by which mandatory and discretionary spending are required to be reduced annually in
both the defense and the nondefense categories. OMB also is responsible for applying the
BBEDCA’s sequestration exemptions and special rules.27 Importantly, while direct spending
reductions are executed each year by a sequestration of all nonexempt accounts, discretionary
spending reductions are achieved through sequestration only in FY2013. In each of the remaining
fiscal years (i.e., FY2014-FY2021), discretionary spending reductions are achieved by lowering
the BCA-imposed discretionary spending caps for defense and nondefense spending by the total
dollar amount of the reduction.
For FY2013, OMB calculated that sequestration would reduce nonexempt nondefense mandatory
spending by 5.1% and reduce nonexempt nondefense discretionary spending by 5.0%.28 For
FY2014, OMB calculated that sequestration would reduce nonexempt nondefense mandatory
spending by 7.2%.29 As noted above, the reduction in defense and nondefense discretionary
spending for FY2014 is achieved through a reduction in the spending caps (see Table 1).
Generally, PHS agency mandatory spending (and FY2013 discretionary spending) is fully
sequestrable at the appropriate rate for nondefense spending, with two important exceptions.
Funding for the Vaccines for Children program, administered by CDC, is transferred from
Medicaid and is fully exempt from sequestration.30 In addition, the BBEDCA sequestration rules
include a 2% limit on cuts in spending on community health centers, migrant health centers, and
IHS. However, OMB concluded in its analysis of the statute that these rules apply only to
mandatory spending reductions and not to cuts in discretionary spending. Thus, reductions in
CHCF (mandatory) funding for community health centers and migrant health centers are capped
at 2%, whereas FY2013 discretionary spending on health centers is fully sequestrable at the rate
27 For an overview of the sequestration exemptions and special rules in BBEDCA Sections. 255 and 256, see CRS
Report R42050, Budget “Sequestration” and Selected Program Exemptions and Special Rules, coordinated by Karen
Spar.
28 U.S. Office of Management and Budget, OMB Report to the Congress on the Joint Committee Sequestration for
Fiscal Year 2013, March 1, 2013, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/
fy13ombjcsequestrationreport.pdf.
29 U.S. Office of Management and Budget, OMB Report to the Congress on the Joint Committee Reductions for Fiscal
Year 2014, April 10, 2013 (Corrected version, May 20, 2013), http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/
assets/legislative_reports/fy14_preview_and_joint_committee_reductions_reports_05202013.pdf.
30 Medicaid is exempt from sequestration. For more information, see CRS Report R42050, Budget “Sequestration” and
Selected Program Exemptions and Special Rules, coordinated by Karen Spar.
Congressional Research Service
8
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
applicable to nonexempt nondefense spending. Similarly, cuts to IHS’s mandatory spending are
capped at 2%, while the agency’s FY2013 discretionary appropriations are fully sequestrable. See
Table 1.
Table 1. Impact of BCA Annual Spending Reductions on PHS Agency Funding
FY2013-FY2014
Percent Reduction
Program
FY2013
FY2014
Mandatory Spending
Nonexempt programs
5.1% 7.2%
Community health centers, migrant health centers, IHS
2.0% 2.0%
Discretionary Spending
Nonexempt programs
5.0%a NAb
Source: OMB Report to the Congress on the Joint Committee Sequestration for Fiscal Year 2013, March 1,
2013; OMB Report to the Congress on the Joint Committee Reductions for Fiscal Year 2014, May 20, 2013.
a. The FY2013 sequestration order on March 1, 2013, occurred prior to enactment of ful -year appropriations
for FY2013. Pursuant to the BBEDCA, OMB calculated the percentage reduction for discretionary spending
(i.e., 5.0%) based on the annualized funding levels under the six-month FY2013 continuing resolution (CR)
that was in effect at the time. The FY2013 CR general y funded discretionary programs at their FY2012
levels plus 0.612%. OMB applied the 5.0% to the annualized funding levels in the CR to determine the dollar
amount reduction for each nonexempt discretionary account. However, the Consolidated and Further
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L. 113-6), which was enacted on March 26, 2013, general y
provided funding at levels slightly below the annualized amounts in the six-month CR. OMB, however, did
not recalculate the percentage reduction for discretionary spending. Instead, pursuant to the BBEDCA, it
applied the dol ar amount reductions calculated based on the six-month CR to the marginal y lower final
FY2013 levels. Thus, the actual percentage reduction was slightly more than 5.0%.
b. As noted in the text, the FY2014 reduction in discretionary spending (defense and nondefense) is achieved
through a reduction in the BCA-imposed discretionary spending caps, rather than through sequestration.
Congress has yet to complete legislative action on any of the regular appropriations bills for FY2014. The
government is currently operating under the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2014 (P.L. 113-46), which
provides appropriations through January 15, 2014. Generally, P.L. 113-46 provides funding at FY2013 post-
sequestration spending levels. This report will be updated with information on PHS agency funding for
FY2014 when full-year appropriations measures are enacted.
Report Outline
The remainder of this report is divided into seven sections, one for each PHS agency. ATSDR and
its budget are included in the discussion of CDC. Each section includes (1) an overview of the
Congressional Research Service
9
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
agency’s statutory authority and principal activities; (2) a summary of agency funding over the
period FY2010-FY2013; and (3) highlights of the agency’s FY2014 budget request. This material
is accompanied by a detailed five-year funding table showing the FY2010-FY2013 funding levels
and the FY2014 budget request for the agency’s budget accounts and for selected programs and
activities within those accounts. The amounts in the funding tables in this report are taken from
the PHS agencies’ budget justification documents for FY2012-FY2014 and the FY2013 operating
plans that were submitted to the appropriations committees.31 The funding figures for FY2013
reflect the Joint Committee sequestration of nonexempt mandatory and discretionary spending.
The funding figures for FY2014 are based on the FY2014 President’s Budget Request. As such,
they do not reflect the sequestration of nonexempt mandatory spending.
Each funding table shows the program level amounts for all the major budget items, which are
summed to give the agency’s total program level. At the bottom of the table, any user fees, PHS
evaluation set-aside funds, ACA funds, and other nondiscretionary funds are subtracted from the
program level to show the agency’s discretionary budget authority. Most tables include one or
more non-add entries (italicized and in parentheses) either to highlight the funding for specific
programs within a larger budget line or, in some instances, to indicate the allocation of user fees
or ACA funds.
It is important to note that, by convention, HHS budget tables show only the amount of set-aside
funds received. They do not subtract the amount of the evaluation tap from donor agencies’
appropriations. The impact of this practice on the presentation of agencies’ budgets is particularly
significant in the case of NIH, whose appropriation is larger than the appropriations of all the
other PHS agencies combined. NIH is the largest donor of set-aside funds, and one of the smallest
recipients. In FY2012, for example, NIH contributed $709 million in set-aside funds, which is not
reflected in the agency’s funding table. It received $8 million, which is allocated for the National
Library of Medicine (see Table 7) and included as part of the NIH’s overall program level.32
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
(AHRQ)
Agency Overview
AHRQ is the federal agency charged with supporting research designed to improve the quality of
health care; increase the efficiency of its delivery; and broaden access to health services. Specific
research efforts in furtherance of these goals include those aimed at reducing the costs of care,
promoting patient safety, and improving health care services, organization, and financing. These
efforts include a focus on dissemination of research findings to health care providers, payers, and
consumers, among others. In addition, the agency collects data on health care expenditures and
utilization through the Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys (MEPS) and Healthcare Cost and
Utilization Project (HCUP).
31 The HHS congressional budget justifications and the FY2013 operating plans for all the HHS operating divisions are
available at http://www.hhs.gov/budget/.
32 HHS, “Use of Public Health Service Set-Aside Authority for Fiscal Year 2012, Report to Congress.”
Congressional Research Service
10
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
AHRQ has evolved from a succession of agencies concerned with fostering health services
research and health care technology assessment. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989
(P.L. 101-239) added a new PHSA Title IX and established the Agency for Health Care Policy
and Research (AHCPR), a successor agency to the former National Center for Health Services
Research and Health Care Technology Assessment (NCHSR). AHCPR was reauthorized in 1992
(P.L. 102-410). On December 6, 1999, President Clinton signed the Healthcare Research and
Quality Act of 1999 (P.L. 106-129), which renamed AHCPR as the Agency for Healthcare
Research and Quality (AHRQ) and reauthorized it through FY2005.33 Since 2005, Congress has
not reauthorized the agency. Despite the expired authorization, AHRQ has continued to receive
funds. Since FY2010, AHRQ has received its entire budget from the PHS evaluation set-aside and
other transfers. The set-aside funds are included in the agency’s overall program level amount but
are not counted as appropriated funds; thus, the agency’s discretionary budget authority shows up
as zero in the table. Additional funds are provided from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Trust Fund (PCORTF) and the Prevention and Public Health Fund (PPHF), both established by
ACA and described in Appendix C and Appendix D of this report, respectively.
The AHRQ budget is organized according to three program areas: (1) Healthcare Costs, Quality
and Outcomes (HCQO) Research; (2) the Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys (MEPS); and (3)
program support. HCQO research focuses on six priority areas, summarized in the text box
below.
Healthcare Costs, Quality and Outcomes (HCQO) Research Areas
Health Information Technology (HIT). Research evaluating HIT and its impact on the quality and efficiency of
health care.
General Patient Safety Research. Research on reducing and preventing medical errors, with a focus on health
care-associated infections (HAIs).
Patient-Centered Health Research. Research comparing the effectiveness of different treatment options
(previously referred to as comparative effectiveness research).
Research Innovations. Research on quality of health care that spans multiple priority areas including, for example,
the annual National Healthcare Quality and National Healthcare Disparities Reports.
Value. Research and projects supporting value in health care, focusing on reducing cost and improving quality.
Prevention/Care Management. Research on improving the delivery of primary care and preventive services.
FY2010-FY2013 Funding
As shown in Table 2, AHRQ’s total program level increased by $27 million (6.7%) between
FY2010 and FY2013, from $403 million to $429 million. This overall growth was the result of
increasing ACA fund transfers during this time, which offset a decrease in evaluation set-aside
funding for the agency of $32 million (8.0%). Between FY2010 and FY2013, total transfers from
the PPHF and the PCORTF to the agency increased from $6 million to $64 million. During
FY2011 and FY2012, transfers from the PPHF increased but returned in FY2013 to a level close
to the FY2010 level, while PCORTF transfers increased steadily (according to statutory
requirements). The total program level for the agency for FY2013 includes $365 million in
evaluation set-aside funding and a total of $64 million in transfers from ACA funds ($6 million
from PPHF and $58 million from PCORTF).
33 See the AHRQ website at http://www.ahrq.gov.
Congressional Research Service
11
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Notable shifts in program area funding levels between FY2010 and FY2013 include the changing
level for Patient-Centered Health Research, which increased by $47 million during this period, as
a result of the fund transfers from PCORTF. In addition, funding for General Patient Safety
Research decreased between FY2010 and FY2013 by $24 million. Funds transferred from the
PPHF have supported an increase in funding for prevention and care management activities over
this period, and have been used in part to fund the activities of the U.S. Preventive Services Task
Force (USPSTF).
FY2014 President’s Budget Request
For FY2014, the President is requesting a total program level of $434 million for AHRQ; this
would be comprised of both funds from the PHS evaluation set-aside ($334 million) and a
transfer from PCORTF ($100 million), and would represent an increase of about $4 million
(1.0%) from the AHRQ Sequestration Operating Plan for FY2013. This would continue the trend
of decreasing PHS evaluation set-aside funding being offset by increasing ACA fund transfers. In
addition, under the President’s request, no transfer of funds would be made from the PPHF for the
first time since the establishment of that fund (FY2010). Under the President’s request, most of
the program areas under HCQO would receive decreases in their funding, with the exception of
Patient-Centered Health Research, which would receive an increase of $32 million as a result of
the increased PCORTF transfer.
Table 2 presents AHRQ funding from FY2010 through the FY2014 President’s Budget request.
Overall program level funding is shown in bold for HCQO, MEPS, and program support.
Additional details are provided for research areas and sources of funding (transfers). Program
level funding for HCQO, MEPS, and Program Support is summed and presented as total program
level. Transfers are subtracted from the total program level to show the discretionary budget
authority (i.e., discretionary appropriation as provided by Congress) at the bottom of the table. In
AHRQ’s case, in the years specified in the table, the agency was solely funded by set-aside funds
and transfers. Thus, the discretionary budget authority is “0”. For a detailed discussion of the
funding concepts noted in the table, see the discussions in Appendix C, Appendix D, and “PHS
Program Evaluation Set-Aside” in this report.
Table 2. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
(Dollars in Millions)
FY2014
Program or Activity
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
request
Health Costs, Quality and Outcomes
(HCQO) Research
276 266 272 300 301
Health Information Technology
28
28
26
26
26
General Patient Safety Research
91
66
66
67
63
Patient-Centered Health Research
21
29
41
68
100
PCORTF Transfer (non-add)
—
(8)
(24)
(58)
(100)
Research Innovationsa
112
112
108
111 89
Value Research
4
4
4
4
3
Prevention/Care Management
21
28
28
26
21
PPHF Transfer (non-add)
(6)
(12)
(12)
(6)
—
Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys (MEPS)
59
59
59
61
64
Program Support 68
68
74
68
69
Total, Program Level
403
392
405
429
434
Congressional Research Service
12
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
FY2014
Program or Activity
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
request
Less Funds From Other Sources
PHS Evaluation Funds
397
372
369
365
334
PCORTF Transfers
—
8
24
58 100
PPHF Transfers
6
12
12
6
—
Total, Discretionary Budget Authority
0
0
0
0
0
Sources: The amounts for FY2010, FY2011, and FY2014 are taken from the FY2012, FY2013, and FY2014
congressional budget justification documents. Funding amounts for FY2012 and FY2013 are taken from:
“Sequestration Operating Plan for Fiscal Year 2013: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality,” May 2013.
These documents are available at http://www.hhs.gov/budget/. Funding amounts for FY2013 reflect sequestration.
Notes: Individual amounts may not add to subtotals or totals due to rounding.
a. Formerly “Crosscutting Activities.”
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Agency Overview
According to CDC, its mission is “[c]ollaborating to create the expertise, information, and tools
that people and communities need to protect their health—through health promotion, prevention
of disease, injury and disability, and preparedness for new health threats.”34 CDC is organized
into a number of centers, institutes, and offices, some focused on specific public health challenges
(e.g., injury prevention), others on general public health capabilities (e.g., surveillance and
laboratory services).35 The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) is headed
by the CDC Director and is discussed in this section.
Many CDC activities are not specifically authorized but are based in broad, permanent authorities
in the PHSA.36 Four CDC operating divisions are explicitly authorized. The National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) was permanently authorized by the Occupational
Safety and Health Act of 1970.37 The National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental
Disabilities (NCBDDD) was established in PHSA Section 317C by the Children’s Health Act of
2000.38 The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) was established in PHSA Section 306
by the Health Services Research, Health Statistics, and Medical Libraries Act of 1974.39 ATSDR
was established by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
of 1980 (CERCLA, the “Superfund” law).40
34 See the CDC website at http://www.cdc.gov/about/organization/mission.htm.
35 Information about CDC’s organization is available at http://www.cdc.gov/about/organization/cio.htm.
36 For example, PHSA Section 301 authorizes the Secretary of HHS to conduct research and investigations as necessary
to control disease, and Section 317 authorizes the Secretary to award grants to states for preventive health programs.
37 29 U.S.C. §671.
38 42 U.S.C. §247b-4.
39 42 U.S.C. §242k.
40 42 U.S.C. §9604(i). Authorizations of appropriations for NCBDDD, NCHS, and ATSDR have expired, but the
programs continue to receive annual appropriations.
Congressional Research Service
13
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
CDC provides financial and technical assistance to state, local, municipal, tribal, and foreign
governments, and to academic and non-profit entities. Nearly 85% of the agency’s funding is
spent on grants and contracts.41 CDC has few regulatory responsibilities.
Most CDC programs are funded through the Labor-HHS-ED appropriations act; ATSDR is
funded separately through the Interior/Environment appropriations act. Table 3 presents funding
levels for CDC programs for FY2010 through the FY2014 request. In addition to annual
discretionary appropriations, program level amounts for recent years include funds from the
following four mandatory appropriations: (1) the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program;42 (2)
NIOSH activities to support the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program
(EEOICPA);43 (3) the World Trade Center (WTC) Health Program;44 and (4) appropriations
provided under ACA, principally through the PPHF.45 CDC also receives annual funds through
the PHS evaluation set-aside and authorized user fees, and may also receive funding through
supplemental appropriations and other transfers.
FY2010-FY2013 Funding
Overall, CDC’s discretionary budget authority decreased from FY2010 to FY2013. The
CDC/ATSDR program level increased from FY2010 through FY2012 then decreased to below
the FY2010 level for FY2013. The decrease for FY2013 was due somewhat to sequestration, but
in larger part to a decrease in the amount of funds transferred from the PPHF. Sequestration
reduced the FY2013 program level by $293 million compared with the FY2012 level.46
Additionally, the PPHF transfer for FY2013 was $346 million less than for FY2012.
Most CDC accounts—including EEOICPA and WTC mandatory funds—were subject to
sequestration for FY2013. VFC funds, which are transferred from the Medicaid program, are
exempt. The PPHF is also subject to sequestration, which was applied to FY2013 PPHF funds
before they were distributed. However, the decreased availability of FY2013 PPHF funds for
CDC (and other PHS agencies) was due mainly to a large one-time PPHF distribution to CMS for
enrollment activities for ACA-mandated health insurance exchanges, rather than to sequestration.
Appendix C in this report provides more information about PPHF distributions for FY2013.
In order to blunt the effects of the decreased CDC FY2013 program level, the HHS Secretary
used transfer authority provided in annual appropriations for a one-time net transfer of $79
million to CDC from other HHS accounts, principally at NIH.47
41 See CDC, Procurements and Grants, http://www.cdc.gov/about/business/funding.htm.
42 See CDC, Vaccines for Children Program, http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/programs/vfc/index.html.
43 See CDC, EEOICPA, “Frequently Asked Questions,” http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/faqsact.html.
44 See CRS Report R41292, Comparison of the World Trade Center Medical Monitoring and Treatment Program and
the World Trade Center Health Program Created by Title I of P.L. 111-347, the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and
Compensation Act of 2010, by Scott D. Szymendera and Sarah A. Lister.
45 CRS Report R41301, Appropriations and Fund Transfers in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA),
by C. Stephen Redhead. See more information about the PPHF in Appendix C of this report.
46 CDC Office of the Chief Operating Officer, June 13, 2013.
47 CDC Office of the Chief Operating Officer, June 13, 2013. See also John Reichard, “HHS to Use $454 Million From
Prevention Fund for Health Insurance Enrollment,” CQ HealthBeat, April 15, 2013.
Congressional Research Service
14
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
FY2014 President’s Budget Request
For FY2014, the Administration requests $5.217 billion in budget authority, $220 million (4%)
less than the FY2013 post-sequester amount. The Administration proposes, however, to increase
the agency’s program level by using transfers from the PPHF ($755 million) and the evaluation
tap ($618 million). This increase, which would be almost $1 billion more than the FY2013 level,
reflects increases in these transfers, as well as an increase of $686 million in an estimated transfer
to the Vaccines for Children program. As with several previous years, the Administration
proposes to eliminate the Preventive Health and Health Services block grant for FY2014, stating
that PPHF funds serve the same purpose.48
CDC’s FY2014 budget presentation includes a plan to implement a “Working Capital Fund,” a
revolving fund to be used by agency programs to “pay for” the agency’s centralized services, such
as human resources and procurement. These services have received direct appropriations in the
past.49 In order to implement the new fund, the Administration proposes to apply certain business
services funds previously assigned to the Cross-cutting Activities and Program Support account
across programmatic accounts instead. The effect would be to further increase program levels,
above the FY2013 levels, for most of the recipient accounts. However, the FY2013 amounts
provided in the agency’s operating plan and displayed in Table 3 were not adjusted to reflect this
realignment of funds, and are therefore not comparable to the FY2014 requested amounts.
Table 3 presents CDC/ATSDR funding from FY2010 through the FY2014 President’s Budget
request. Overall program level funding is shown in bold for CDC programs. Discretionary budget
authority (BA), mandatory funds, and other sources of funding, including transfers, are provided
for each program. Funding for select projects is also presented; these are displayed as non-adds
under the appropriate program. Overall program level funding is summed and presented as total
program level. Transfers, user fees, and mandatory funds are subtracted from the total program
level to show the discretionary budget authority (i.e., discretionary appropriation as provided by
Congress) at the bottom of the table. For a detailed discussion of the funding concepts noted in
the table, see the discussions in Appendix C and “PHS Program Evaluation Set-Aside” in this
report.
Table 3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)
(Dollars in millions)
FY2014
Program or Activity
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013a
requestb
Immunization and Respiratory Diseases
721
748
779
679
754
BA 708
479
576
563a 669
PHS Evaluation Funds
13
13
13
13
13
PPHF Transfer
0
100
190
91
72
PHSSEF Transfer
0
156
0
12
0
48 See, for example, “Program Decreases and Eliminations” in FY2014 CDC congressional budget justification, p. 13.
49 Ibid, p. 16.
Congressional Research Service
15
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
FY2014
Program or Activity
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013a
requestb
HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STI and TB
1,119
1,116
1,110
1,048
1,177
BA 1,088
1,116
1,100
1,045a 1,174
PHS Evaluation Funds
0
0
0
4
3
PPHF
Transfer
30 0 10 0 0
Emerging & Zoonotic Infectious Diseases
281
304
304
291
432
BA 261
252
252
247a 381
PPHF
Transfer
20 52 52 44 52
Chronic Disease Prevention and Health
924 1,075 1,167 973 1,036
Promotion
BA 865
774
756
740a 620
PPHF
Transfer
59 301 411 233 416
ACA Community Transformation Grants
(0) (0)
(226)
(146) (0)
(non-add)
Birth Defects, Developmental Disabilities,
144 136 137 130 142
Disability and Health
BA
144 136 137 130 67
PPHF
Transfer
0 0 0 0 75
Environmental
Health
181 170 140 123 155
BA 181
135
105
103a 126
PPHF
Transfer
0 35 35 21 29
Injury Prevention and Control
149
144
138
131
182
BA
149 144 138 131 177
PHS Evaluation Funds
0
0
0
0
5
Public Health Scientific Services
441
468
462
443
539
BA 161
148
144
144a 144
PHS Evaluation Funds
248
248
248
248
325
PPHF
Transfer
32 72 70 52 70
Occupational Safety and Healthc
430 442 536 573 568
BA
283 224 182 172
0
PHS Evaluation Funds
92
92
111
111
272
Energy Employees Compensation Program
55
55
55
51
55
World Trade Center Health Programd 0
71
188
239
241
Global
Health
354 340 348 329 393
Public Health Preparedness and Response
1,522
1,415
1,329
1,232
1,334
BA
1,522 1,337 1,299 1,232 1,334
PPHF Transfer
0
10
0
0
0
PHSSEF Transfer
0
69
30
0
0
Congressional Research Service
16
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
FY2014
Program or Activity
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013a
requestb
Crosscutting Activities and Program
730e 605 659 624 173
Supporte
BA 680
564
618
601a 131
Prevention Block Grant (non-add)
(100)
(80)
(80)
(75)
(0)
PPHF
Transfer
50 41 41 23 41
ATSDR
77 77 76 72 76
Other ACA Transfers
48g 0 0 0 0
User
Fees
2 2 2 2 2
Vaccines for Childrenf
3,761 3,953 4,006 3,607 4,293
Total, CDC/ATSDR Program Level
10,884
10,995
11,193
10,258a
11,257
Less Funds From Other Sources
PHSSEF Transfers
0
225
30
12
0
PHS Evaluation Funds
352
352
371
375
618
PPHF
Transfers
192 611 809 463 755
Other ACA Transfers
48g 0 0 0 0
User
Fees
2 2 2 2 2
Other Mandatory Funds
3,816
4,079
4,249
3,897
4,589
Total, CDC/ATSDR Discretionary Budget
6,474
5,726
5,732
5,509a
5,293
Authority
Less ATSDR Discretionary Budget
77
77
76
72
76
Authority
Total, CDC Discretionary Budget
6,397
5,649
5,656
5,437
5,217
Authority
Sources: The amounts for FY2010, FY2011, FY2012, and FY2014 are taken from the CDC congressional budget
justifications for FY2012 and FY2014. Funding amounts for FY2013 reflect sequestration and are taken from the
FY2013 operating plan, http://www.cdc.gov/fmo/index.html; CDC Office of the Chief Operating Officer, June 13,
2013.
Notes: Individual amounts may not add to subtotals or totals due to rounding. PHSSEF is the Public Health and
Social Services Emergency Fund, a fund used by appropriators to provide the Secretary with ongoing or one-time
emergency funding, such as for the response to influenza epidemics. STI is sexually transmitted infection.
a. In addition, budget authority for FY2013 includes a one-time net transfer of $79 million in total from other
HHS agencies, pursuant to the HHS Secretary’s transfer authority (Sec. 206, general provision in HHS
annual appropriations acts), distributed to the fol owing CDC accounts: Immunization and Respiratory
Diseases; HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STI, and TB Prevention; Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases;
Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion; Environmental Health; Public Health Scientific Services;
and Cross-cutting Activities and Program Support. CDC Office of the Chief Operating Officer, June 13,
2013.
b. Most BA and program level amounts requested for FY2014 reflect a proposed realignment of funds from
certain business services in the Cross-cutting Activities and Program Support account into other accounts,
in order to implement the Working Capital Fund, discussed in the text of this report. As a result, most
amounts requested for FY2014 are not comparable to amounts for previous fiscal years.
c. Program levels for Occupational Safety and Health include Energy Employees and World Trade Center
mandatory program funds.
Congressional Research Service
17
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
d. Beginning July 1, 2011 (i.e., for the final quarter of FY2011), the World Trade Center Program, previously
funded through discretionary appropriations, was replaced by a mandatory program. Amounts presented
are estimates. Although FY2013 funds are subject to sequestration, because these funds exceed estimated
obligations, the sequester will not affect FY2013 obligations. The reduced amount will be reflected in
amounts available for the program in FY2015. CDC Office of the Chief Operating Officer, June 13, 2013.
e. Amounts for FY2010 include amounts previously designated as Public Health Leadership and Support,
Business Services Support, Buildings and Facilities, and Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant.
f.
The Vaccines for Children (VFC) program provides free pediatric vaccines to doctors who serve eligible
(generally low-income) children. VFC is funded entirely as an entitlement through federal Medicaid
appropriations and is exempt from sequestration. Amounts for FY2012 through FY2014 are estimates.
g. Amount reflects $25 million for a childhood obesity demonstration project, http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/
childhood/researchproject.html, and $23 million for an asbestos health screening program in Libby,
Montana.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
Agency Overview
FDA regulates the safety of human foods, dietary supplements, cosmetics, and animal foods; the
safety and effectiveness of human drugs, biological products (e.g., vaccines), medical devices,
radiation-emitting products, and animal drugs; and the manufacture, marketing, and distribution
of tobacco products.50
Seven centers within FDA represent the broad program areas for which the agency has
responsibility: the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), the Center for Devices
and Radiological Health (CDRH), the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), the
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN), the Center for Veterinary Medicine
(CVM), the National Center for Toxicological Research (NCTR), and the Center for Tobacco
Products (CTP). Several offices have agency-wide responsibilities.
The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) is the principal source of FDA’s statutory
authority.51 FDA is also responsible for administering certain provisions in other laws, most
notably the PHSA.52 Although the FDA’s authorizing committees in Congress are the committees
with jurisdiction over public health issues—the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions, and the House Committee on Energy and Commerce—FDA’s assignment within
the appropriations committees reflects its origin as part of the Department of Agriculture. The
Senate and House appropriations subcommittees on Agriculture, Rural Development, FDA, and
Related Agencies have jurisdiction over FDA’s budget, even though the agency has been part of
various federal health agencies (HHS and its predecessors) since 1940.
50 See the FDA website at http://www.fda.gov.
51 21 U.S.C. §§301 et seq.
52 PHSA Section 351 (21 U.S.C. §262) authorizes the regulation of biological products and states that FFDCA
requirements apply to biological products licensed under the PHSA. A listing of other laws containing provisions for
which FDA is responsible is at http://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Legislation/default.htm.
Congressional Research Service
18
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
FDA’s budget has two funding streams: annual appropriations (i.e., discretionary budget
authority) and industry user fees.53 In FDA’s annual appropriation, Congress sets both the total
amount of appropriated funds and the level of user fees to be collected that year. Appropriated
funds are largely for the Salaries and Expenses account, with a much smaller amount for the
Buildings and Facilities account. Several different user fees, which accounted for 41% of FDA’s
total FY2013 program level,54 contribute only to the Salaries and Expenses account.
The largest and oldest FDA user fee that is linked to a specific program was first authorized by
the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA, P.L. 102-571) in 1992. Appendix E presents the
authorizing legislation for current FDA user fees, sorted by the dollar amount they contribute to
the FY2013 budget. After PDUFA, Congress added user fee authorities regarding medical
devices, animal drugs, animal generic drugs, tobacco products, priority review, food reinspection,
food recall, voluntary qualified food importer, and, most recently, generic drugs and biosimilars.
Several indefinite authorities apply to fees for mammography inspection, color additive
certification, and export certification.55
FY2010-FY2013 Funding
From FY2010 to FY2013, Congress increased FDA’s discretionary budget authority (annual
appropriations) by less than one percent (0.7%). However, because of a 120% increase in user fee
revenue the total program level for FDA increased 29% over that period. Between the FY2012
actual appropriations and the FY2013 Sequestration Operating Plan, discretionary budget
authority decreased 5% while user fees increased 24%, yielding an overall total program level
increase of 5%. During FY2013, collections from each continuing user fee program increased and
two new user fee programs took effect. Between FY2010 and FY2013, the proportion of the
agency’s budget that came from user fees increased from 30% to 41%.
FDA statutory responsibilities have increased since FY2010, and new user fees do not cover all
the new activities. The Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-85),
the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA, P.L. 111-353), and the Food and Drug
Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA, P.L. 112-144) added requirements
concerning food, drug, biologics, and device regulation.56
53 For additional information on the history of the FDA budget, see CRS Report RL34334, The Food and Drug
Administration: Budget and Statutory History, FY1980-FY2007, coordinated by Judith A. Johnson.
54 CRS calculation from FDA, “Food and Drug Administration Sequestration Operating Plan [for FY2013],”
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/Reports/BudgetReports/UCM352114.pdf.
55 User fees provide varying proportions of funding for several FDA programs. For example, the agency’s tobacco
regulatory activities are entirely supported through user fees paid by tobacco product manufacturers and importers. In
FY2013, PDUFA revenues account for 63.1% of the human drugs program budget; fees provide 36.8% of the biologics
budget, 22.9% of the devices and radiological health budget, 18.6% of the animal drugs and feeds budget, and 2.0% of
the foods budget. Appendix E of this report presents additional detail.
56 See, for example, statement of Margaret A. Hamburg, Commissioner of Food and Drugs, FDA, before the House
Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and
Related Agencies, “President’s Fiscal year 2014 Budget Request for the FDA,” April 26, 2013; and Stephen Grossman,
“Funding Cutbacks at FDA: A Sequester Primer,” FDA Matters, March 7, 2013. For details of the additional
responsibilities, see CRS Report RL34465, FDA Amendments Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-85), by Susan Thaul; CRS Report
R40443, The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (P.L. 111-353), coordinated by Renée Johnson; and CRS Report
R42680, The Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA, P.L. 112-144), coordinated by Susan
Thaul.
Congressional Research Service
19
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
FY2014 President’s Budget Request
The President requested a FY2014 FDA total program level of $4.654 billion, which is the sum of
budget authority and user fees. As is customary, the total request included some new fees that
Congress has not yet authorized. Without those proposed fees, which the appropriators cannot
include in the FY2014 bill unless Congress and the President enact them into law, the total
program level request is $4.384 billion, 8.8% higher than the FY2013 Sequestration Operating
Plan. The request includes $2.558 billion in budget authority and $1.827 billion in authorized user
fees, 7.2% and 11.0% above FY2013 levels respectively.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has interpreted the Budget Control Act of 2011
(BCA, P.L. 112-25), which governs sequestration action, as requiring that user fees be included in
the sequestrable base along with directly appropriated budget authority.57 The FDA Commissioner
estimated that FDA would lose about $83 million in user fees in FY2013.58 The FFDCA sections
authorizing FDA user fees for drugs and medical devices limit the use of fee revenue to specified
agency activities. Because the sequestered user fee collections may not be used for other
purposes, they remain untouchable in the FDA account. The FDA Commissioner, some Members
of Congress, industry, and others have urged that fees be exempted from sequestration.59 Their
attempts have not altered the FY2013 sequester. Members of the House and Senate appropriations
subcommittees working on a FY2014 bill have stated their intentions to work together to find a
way to avoid fee sequestering for that year.60
Table 4 presents FDA funding from FY2010 through the FY2014 President’s Budget request.
Overall program level funding is shown in bold for FDA program areas.61 Discretionary budget
authority (BA) and user fees (fees) are provided for each program area. At the bottom of the table,
overall program level funding is summed and presented as total program level. User fees are then
subtracted from the total program level to show the discretionary budget authority (i.e.,
discretionary appropriation as provided by Congress). For a detailed list of user fee
authorizations, see the discussions in Appendix E of this report.
57 Office of Management and Budget (OMB), OMB Report to the Congress on the Joint Committee Sequestration for
Fiscal Year 2013, March 1, 2013, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/
fy13ombjcsequestrationreport.pdf.
58 Remarks by Margaret A. Hamburg, Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 2013 FDLI Annual Conference, Washington,
DC, April 23, 2013.
59 See, for example, CQ Congressional Transcripts, “Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural
Development, FDA, and Related Agencies Holds Hearing on President Obama’s Fiscal 2014 Budget Proposal for the
Food and Drug Administration,” April 18, 2013; Alliance for a Stronger FDA, “Advocacy at a Glance,” June 14, 2013
http://strengthenfda.org/2013/06/14/advocacy-at-a-glance-90/; and Nanci Bompey, “House Appropriators Hold Off On
FDA User Fee Sequestration Exemption,” FDA Week, June 14, 2014.
60 Nanci Bompey, “House Appropriators Hold Off On FDA User Fee Sequestration Exemption,” FDA Week, June 14,
2014. Representative Lance, along with bipartisan co-sponsors, on July 18, 2013, introduced H.R. 2725, the Food and
Drug Administration Safety over Sequestration Act of 2013 to amend the BCA to exempt from sequestration certain
FDA user fees.
61 Funding for a product-specific program, such as Foods or Human Drugs, includes funding for the program center
(e.g., Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition or the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research) and the related
activities of the Office of Regulatory Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
20
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Table 4. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
(Dollars in Millions)
FY2014
Program area
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Request
Foods 783
836
883
813
1107
BA
783
836
866
797
883
Fees
—
—
17
17
224
Human drugs
884
950
979
1,187
1,292
BA
462
478
478
439
466
Fees
421
472
501
748
826
Biologics 291
302
329
308
338
BA
206
212
212
195
211
Fees
86
90
117
113
127
Animal drugs and feeds
154
159
166
155
191
BA
134
139
138
126
142
Fees
20
20
28
29
49
Devices and radiological health
370
379
376
384
435
BA
314
322
323
296
321
Fees
57
56
53
88
115
Tobacco products
64
136
455
459
501
BA
—
—
—
—
—
Fees
64
136
455
459
501
Toxicological research
59
61
60
55
60
BA
59
61
60
55
60
Fees
—
—
—
—
—
Headquarters/Commissioner’s Office
178
187
223
251
298
Congressional Research Service
21
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
FY2014
Program area
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Request
BA
141
150
154
160
173
Fees
37
37
69
91
125
GSA rent
178
178
205
199
228
BA
145
151
161
150
162
Fees
32
27
45
49
66
Other rent and rent-related activitiesa 124
129
132
157
183
BA
103
100
106
118
133
Fees
21
30
26
40
50
Export and color certification funds
10
11
11
12
12
BA
—
—
—
—
—
Fees
10
11
11
12
12
Buildings & Facilities
22
13
9
5
9
BA
22b 13 9 5 9
Fees
0
0
0
0
0
Food and drug safetyc
—
—
—
46 0
BA
—
—
—
46
0
Fees
—
—
—
0
0
Total, Program Level
3,118
3,339
3,832
4,031
4,654d
Less Funds From Other Sources
User Fees
748
879
1,326
1,645
2,096d
Total, Discretionary Budget
Authority
2,369
2,460
2,506
2,386
2,558
Sources: The amounts for FY2010, FY2011, FY2012, and FY2014 are taken from the FY2012, FY2013, and
FY2014 congressional budget justification documents. Funding amounts for FY2013 reflect sequestration and are
taken from the FDA FY2013 Sequestration Operation Plan. These documents are available at
http://www.hhs.gov/budget/.
Congressional Research Service
22
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Notes: Consistent with the Administration and congressional committee formats, each program area includes
funding designated for the responsible FDA center (e.g., the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research or the
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition) and the portion of effort budgeted for the agency-wide Office of
Regulatory Affairs to commit to that area. It also apportions user fee revenue across the program areas as
indicated in the Administration’s request (e.g., 90% of the animal drug user fee revenue is designated for the
animal drugs and feeds program, with the rest going to headquarters and Office of the Commissioner, GSA rent,
and other rent and rent-related activities categories).
a. Other rent and rent-related activities include White Oak consolidation.
b. The FY2010 Buildings & Facilities appropriation included about $7 million for the National Center for
Natural Products Research, as directed by the Committee on Appropriations.
c. The FY2013 Sequestration Operating Plan notes food safety and drug safety items that had not been
included in the program-level appropriations.
d. The President’s FY2014 request includes $1.827 billion in user fees from currently authorized programs
(prescription drug, tobacco product, generic drug, medical device, animal drug, biosimilars, mammography
quality, food reinspection, food recall, color certification, animal generic drug, and export certification) plus
$269 million in proposed user fees (medical product reinspection, international courier, food establishment
registration, food imports, cosmetics, and food contact notification) that would require authorizing
legislation to implement. Without those proposed fees, the President’s total program level request is $4.384
billion.
Health Resources and Services Administration
(HRSA)
Agency Overview
HRSA is the federal agency charged with improving access to health care for those who are
uninsured, isolated, or medically vulnerable. The agency currently awards funding to more than
3,000 grantees, including community-based organizations; colleges and universities; hospitals;
state, local, and tribal governments; and private entities to support health services projects.62
HRSA also administers the health centers program, which provides grants to non-profit entities
that provide primary care services to people who experience financial, geographic, cultural, or
other barriers to health care.63
HRSA is organized into six bureaus and ten offices as outlined in the text box below. Some focus
on specific populations or health care issues, while others provide technical assistance to HRSA’s
regional offices.64
62 See also HRSA’s website at http://www.hrsa.gov.
63 For more information, see CRS Report R42433, Federal Health Centers, by Elayne J. Heisler.
64 See also HRSA’s website at http://www.hrsa.gov.
Congressional Research Service
23
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
HRSA Bureaus
The Bureau of Primary Health Care administers the Health Centers program, which aims to provide access to
primary care for individuals who are low-income, uninsured, or living where health care is scarce. Title III of the PHSA
authorizes the Health Centers Program; the Free Clinics Medical Malpractice program; and the National Hansen’s
Disease Program, which are administered by the bureau. The bureau also administers mandatory ACA funding for
School Based-Health Centers and Community Health Centers.
The Bureau of Clinician Recruitment and Service administers several health workforce programs. These
programs recruit clinicians from diverse backgrounds to provide services in underserved communities and areas with
critical health care provider shortages. They include the National Health Service Corps, nursing student scholarship
and loan repayment programs, and the Faculty Loan Repayment Program. Titles III, VII, and VIII of the PHSA authorize
programs in this bureau.
The Bureau of Health Professions administers a number of programs for health professions training and
development of diversity and cultural competence in the health workforce. These programs include the Oral Health
Training Program, Nursing Workforce Diversity Program, Children’s Hospitals Graduate Medical Education Program,
and the Scholarships for Disadvantaged Students Program. The Bureau of Health Professions also administers the
National Practitioner and Healthcare Integrity Protection Data Banks and the National Center for Health Workforce
Analysis. Titles III, VII, and VIII of the PHSA authorize programs in this bureau.
The Maternal and Child Health Bureau administers the Maternal and Child Health Block Grant65 and other
programs that support the infrastructure for maternal and child health services, including the Maternal, Infant, and
Early Childhood Home Visiting Program that was authorized and funded by ACA. These programs are authorized in
the Social Security Act (SSA). This bureau also administers Healthy Start, newborn hearing screening, autism, and
other programs authorized under the PHSA.
The HIV/AIDS Bureau administers the Ryan White HIV/AIDS program, which is the largest discretionary grant
program within HRSA and is focused on HIV/AIDS care. The Ryan White HIV/AIDS program administers grant
programs that provide early intervention, minority, and family services. It also administers the AIDS Drug Assistance
Program (ADAP). Title XXVI of the PHSA authorizes the Ryan White HIV/AIDS programs.
The Healthcare Systems Bureau provides national leadership and direction in targeted areas, such as organ and
bone marrow transplantation, poison control centers, and others. Titles III and XII of the PHSA authorize programs
in the Healthcare Systems Bureau.
As noted above, the majority of HRSA’s programs are authorized in the PHSA and the SSA.
Additionally, Section 427(e) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Amendments Act (P.L. 95-
164) authorizes the Black Lung Program, which supports clinics that provide services to retired
coal miners and others.
FY2010-FY2013 Funding
As shown in Table 5, HRSA’s discretionary budget authority from FY2010 to FY2013 decreased
by 22% from $7.492 billion to $5.863 billion. However, HRSA’s total program level increased
from $8.067 billion in FY2010 to $9.666 billion in FY2011, and then decreased to $8.100 billion
in FY2013. These fluctuations are largely due to changes in the amount of ACA mandatory funds
provided to HRSA over this period, including the Community Health Center Fund (CHCF),
which provided funding to support the federal health center program and the National Health
Service Corps.
Program level funding for the health centers program (see Primary Care Bureau in Table 5)
increased by $756 million, from $2.253 billion in FY2010 to $3.009 billion in FY2013. ACA
65 For more information, see CRS Report R42428, The Maternal and Child Health Services Block Grant: Background
and Funding, by Amalia K. Corby-Edwards.
Congressional Research Service
24
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
mandatory appropriations provided an increasing proportion of health center funding over this
time period, increasing from $1 billion in FY2011 to $1.465 billion in FY2013 (see Appendix A).
Other ACA funding for this bureau includes $1.5 billion for health center construction, and four
years of funding totaling $200 million for the School-Based Health Centers program.
Overall, funding for health workforce programs has decreased by $247 million, from $1.248
million in FY2010 to $1.001 billion in FY2013. The FY2012 appropriations law eliminated
discretionary funding for the National Health Service Corps. However, the program continues to
receive mandatory CHCF funding (see Appendix B).
Funding for maternal and child health programs at HRSA increased from $984 million in FY2010
to $1.192 billion in FY2013. This increase was largely due to mandatory funds for the Maternal,
Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting program which were appropriated under ACA. Those
funds increased incrementally from $100 million in FY2010 to $380 million in FY2013. Funding
for the Maternal and Child Health Block Grant decreased from $661 million in FY2010 to $605
million in FY2013. Family to Family Health Information Centers, which were appropriated $5
million for each of FY2010 through FY2012 in ACA, were reauthorized and appropriated $5
million for FY2013 under the American Taxpayer Relief Act (ATRA) of 2012.66
With the exception of the FY2013 sequester, funding for the Ryan White HIV/AIDS program has
risen steadily.67 The FY2012 appropriation provided a total of $2.248 billion in discretionary
funds for the Ryan White HIV/AIDS program, an increase of about $77 million over FY2010.
The increase was targeted to the AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP). Congress has also
provided $25 million in evaluation set-aside funds for the program.
The Healthcare Systems Bureau received a one-time appropriation of $100 million in FY2010 for
hospital construction grants under ACA Section 10502. FY2010 was also the final year of funding
for the State Health Access Grant Program, which received $74 million that year. Funding for
HRSA’s cord blood, organ transplantation, and cell transplantation programs remained relatively
flat since FY2010. Federal funding for Poison Control Centers decreased from $29 million in
FY2010 to $17 million in FY2013.
Rural health funding decreased from $185 million in FY2010 to $131 million in FY2013, largely
due to the elimination of funding for the Delta Health Initiative and the Denali Project. Also of
note in this time period is the elimination of congressional projects (also known as “earmarks”) in
the FY2011 appropriations process. Congressional projects were funded at $337 million in
FY2010.
FY2014 President’s Budget Request
The President’s Budget for FY2014 requests $9.043 billion in program level funding for HRSA.
This amount includes $6.022 billion in discretionary budget authority, $2.962 billion in
mandatory ACA funding (including PPHF transfers), plus additional evaluation set-aside funds
and user fees.
66 P.L. 112-240.
67 See CRS Report RL33279, The Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program, by Judith A. Johnson for more information on this
program.
Congressional Research Service
25
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Absent further congressional action, HRSA will continue to receive mandatory appropriations
provided in ACA. However, as noted earlier, for FY2013 onward these appropriations will be
subject to sequestration.68 Specifically, mandatory ACA funding for the Health Centers program
will increase from $1.5 billion ($1.465 billion post-sequester) in FY2013 to $2.2 billion in
FY2014. The Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting program will receive its final
ACA-authorized mandatory appropriation of $400 million in FY2014.69 The National Health
Service Corps mandatory appropriation will increase from $300 million ($285 million post-
sequester) in FY2013 to $305 million in FY2014. Although $5 million in annual mandatory
funding for Family-to-Family Health Information Centers in ACA ended in FY2012, ATRA
extended funding for the program through FY2013, appropriating $5 million. No funds are
requested for FY2014.
The Administration requests decreased funding of $88 million for Children’s Hospital Graduate
Medical Education (GME) payments, which were funded at $251 million in FY2013. Increased
funds are requested for Family Planning ($327 million), Pediatric Loan Repayment ($5 million),
and Ryan White HIV/AIDS ($2.412 billion). The Administration also proposes a transfer of $57
million in PPHF funds to HRSA to support Poison Control Centers, Universal Newborn Hearing
Screening, Heritable Disorders, Alzheimer’s prevention, and Public Health Workforce
Development. Lastly, the Administration proposes to transfer the Health Education Assistance
Loan program to the Department of Education, and to eliminate the Rural Access to Emergency
Devices program.
Table 5 presents HRSA funding from FY2010 through the FY2014 President’s Budget request.
Funding in the table is shown in bold for each major budget account, several of which correspond
to specific HRSA bureaus. The Bureaus of Health Professions and Clinician Recruitment and
Service are combined under the title “Health Workforce,” in keeping with their presentation in the
HRSA congressional budget justifications. Overall program level funding is summed and
presented as total program level. Transfers, user fees, and mandatory funds are subtracted from
the total program level to show the discretionary budget authority (i.e., discretionary
appropriation as provided by Congress) at the bottom of the table. For a detailed discussion of the
funding concepts noted in the table, see the discussions in Appendix B, Appendix C, and “PHS
Program Evaluation Set-Aside” in this report.
Table 5. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)
(Dollars in Millions)
FY2014
Bureau or Activity
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Request
Primary
Care
2,253 4,149 2,835 3,009 3,785
Health Centers
2,141 2,481 2,672 2,856 3,672
68 As of the date of this report, post-sequester funding for FY2014 mandatory programs has not yet been released by
OMB.
69 The President has proposed to extend and expand the home visiting program beyond the $1.5 billion that was
provided under ACA.
Congressional Research Service
26
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
FY2014
Bureau or Activity
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Request
CHCF Transfer (non-add)
— (1,000) (1,200) (1,465) (2,200)
Health Center Tort Claims
44
100
95
89
95
School Based Health Centers (ACA Sec. 4101(a))
50 50 50 48 —
Health Center Construction (ACA Sec. 10503(c))
— 1,500
—
—
—
Hansen’s
Disease
Center
16 16 16 15 16
Payment
to
Hawai
2 2 2 2 2
Health
Workforce
1,248 1,359 1,085 1,001 884
National Health Service Corps
141 315 295 285 305
CHCF Transfer (non-add)
— (290) (295) (285) (305)
Advanced
Education
Nursing
95 95 84 79 84
Training
for
Diversity
95 95 85 80 70
Health Care Workforce Assessment
3
3
3
3
5
Primary Care Training and Enhancement
237
39
39
37
51
PPHF Transfer (non-add)
(198)
—
—
—
—
Oral
Health
Training
33 33 32 31 32
Interdisciplinary,
Community-Based
Linkages
72 72 61 60 39
PPHF Transfer (non-add)
(0)
(0)
(10)
(0)
(0)
Public Health Workforce/Prev. Medicine
30
30
45
8
8
PPHF Transfer (non-add)
(21)
(20)
(25)
—
—
Nursing
Workforce
Development
196 150 148 140 168
PPHF
Transfer
(non-add)
(47) — — — —
Children’s Hospital GME
317
268
265
251
88
Pediatric Loan Repayment
—
—
—
— 5
Patient
Navigator
Outreach
5 5 0 0 0
GME Payments for Teaching Health Centers
(ACA Sec. 5508(c))
— 230 —
—
—
National Practitioner Data Bank (User Fees)
20 20 28 27 28
Healthcare Integrity Data Bank (User Fees)
4
4
—
—
—
Maternal and Child Health
984
1,128
1,208
1,192
1,253
Maternal and Child Health Block Grant
661
656
639
605
639
Congressional Research Service
27
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
FY2014
Bureau or Activity
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Request
Early Childhood Home Visiting (ACA Sec. 2951)
100 250 350 380 400
Autism and Other Dev. Disorders
48
48
47
45
47
Traumatic Brain Injury
10
10
10
9
10
Sickle Cell Demonstration
5
5
5
4
5
Universal Newborn Hearing Screening
19
19
19
18
0
PPHF Transfer (non-add)
—
—
—
—
(19)
Emergency Medical Services for Children
21
21
21
20
21
Healthy
Start
105 104 104 98 104
Heritable
Disorders
10 10 10 9 0
PPHF Transfer (non-add)
—
—
—
—
(10)
Family-to-Family Health Information Centers
(ACA Sec. 5507; ATRA Sec. 624)
5 5 5 5 —
Ryan
White
HIV/AIDS
2,312 2,337 2,392 2,248 2,412
Emergency
Relief—Part
A
678 673 666 624 666
Comprehensive
Care—Part
B
1,277 1,308 1,361 1,288 1,371
Early
Intervention—Part
C
206 206 215 194 225
Children, Youth, Women, and Families—Part D
78
77
77
72
77
AIDS Education and Training Centers—Part F
35
35
35
32
35
Dental Reimbursement Program—Part F
14
14
13
13
13
PHS
Evaluation
Funds
25 25 25 25 25
Health
Care
Systems
267 87 83 78 91
Organ
Transplantation
26 25 24 23 26
National Cord Blood Inventory
12
12
12
11
12
C.W. Bill Young Cel Transplantation
24
23
23
22
23
Poison
Control
Centers
29 22 19 17 19
PPHF Transfer (non-add)
—
—
—
—
(19)
340b
Drug
Pricing
2 5 4 4 4
340b Drug Pricing Program (User Fees)
—
—
—
—
6
Health Center Infrastructure (ACA Sec. 10502)
100
—
—
—
—
State
Health
Access
Grants
74 0 0 0 0
Rural
Health
185 138 138 131 122
Rural Health Policy Development
10
10
10
9
10
Rural Health Outreach Grants
56
56
56
52
56
Rural Access to Emergency Devices
3
1
1
2
0
Congressional Research Service
28
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
FY2014
Bureau or Activity
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Request
Rural Hospital Flexibility Grants
41
41
41
38
26
State Offices of Rural Health
10
10
10
9
10
Radiation
Exposure
Screening
2 2 2 2 2
Black
Lung
7 7 7 7 7
Telehealth
12 12 12 11 12
Denali Project
10
—
—
—
—
Congressional Projects
337
—
—
—
—
Program
Management
147 162 160 151 162
Family
Planning
317 299 294 278 327
Healthy Weight Collaborative, PPHF
5
—
—
—
—
Vaccine Injury Compensation, Administration
7
6
6
6
6
Health Education Assistance Loans (HEAL)
4
4
3
3
—
Total, Program Level
8,067
9,666
8,205
8,100
9,043
Less Funds From Other Sources
PHS
Evaluation
Funds
25 25 25 25 25
User
Fees
24 24 28 27 32
PPHF
Transfers
271 20 37 2 57
Other
Mandatory
Funds
255 3,325 1,900 2184 2,905
Total, Discretionary Budget Authority
7,492
6,272
6,215
5,863
6,022
Sources: The amounts for FY2010, FY2011, FY2012, and FY2014 are taken from the FY2012, FY2013, and
FY2014 congressional budget justification documents. Funding amounts for FY2013 reflect sequestration and are
taken from the HRSA FY2013 Sequestration Operation Plan. These documents are available at
http://www.hhs.gov/budget/. The sequestered mandatory funding levels for FY2013 were obtained directly from
the agency.
Note: Individual amounts may not add to subtotals or totals due to rounding.
Indian Health Service (IHS)
Agency Overview
IHS provides health care for approximately 2.2 million eligible American Indians/Alaska Natives
through a system of programs and facilities located on or near Indian reservations, and through
contractors in certain urban areas.70 IHS provides services to members of 566 federally
recognized tribes either directly or through facilities and programs operated by Indian Tribes or
70 U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Indian Health Service, Fiscal Year 2014 Indian Health Service
Justification of Estimates, p. CJ-142, http://www.ihs.gov/BudgetFormulation/documents/
FY2014BudgetJustification.pdf..
Congressional Research Service
29
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Tribal Organizations through self-determination contracts and self-governance compacts
authorized in the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (ISDEAA).71
The Snyder Act of 192172 provides general statutory authority for IHS.73 In addition, specific IHS
programs are authorized by two acts: the Indian Sanitation Facilities Act of 195974 and the Indian
Health Care Improvement Act (IHCIA).75 The Indian Sanitation Facilities Act authorizes the IHS
to construct sanitation facilities for Indian communities and homes, and IHCIA authorizes
programs such as urban health, health professions recruitment, and substance abuse and mental
health treatment, and permits IHS to receive reimbursements from Medicare, Medicaid, the State
Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and third-party insurers.
Unlike most other PHS agencies, IHS receives its appropriations through the Interior/
Environment appropriations act, not the Labor-HHS-ED appropriations act. IHS is also not
subject to the PHS Program Evaluation Set-Aside.
FY2010-FY2013 Funding
Funding for the IHS had increased from FY2010 through FY2012, but with the sequester,
FY2013 funding levels were below FY2012 funding levels. Specifically, from FY2010 to
FY2012 the IHS appropriation increased by $254 million (5.9%), from $4.052 billion to $4.306
billion. The majority of this increase was used to fund additional clinical services, including
providing additional funding for purchased/referred care. This program was previously referred to
as the contract health service (CHS) program. It funds the purchase of essential health services
from local and community health care providers when IHS cannot provide medical care and
specific services through its own system. In general, funding has not allowed the program to meet
all requests, so IHS prioritizes payments based on relative medical need and denies other
requests. Decreasing the number of denied requests has been a priority,76 and funding for this
program increased between FY2010 and FY2012.77 Funding increases were also used to provide
additional funding for contract support costs (CSCs). CSC funding is provided to tribes to help
pay the costs of administering IHS-funded programs under self-determination contracts or self-
71 P.L. 93-638; 25 U.S.C. §450 et seq.
72 P.L. 67-85, as amended; 25 U.S.C. §13.
73 The Snyder Act established this authority as part of the Bureau of Indian Affairs within the Department of the
Interior. The Transfer Act of 1954 (P.L. 83-568) transferred this authority to the U.S. Surgeon General within the then
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (now the Department of Health and Human Services).
74 P.L. 86-121; 42 U.S.C. §2004a.
75 P.L. 94-437, as amended; 25 U.S.C. §§1601 et seq., and 42 U.S.C. §§1395qq and 1396j (and amending other
sections). This act was permanently reauthorized as part of ACA. Changes made by the reauthorization are summarized
in CRS Report R41630, The Indian Health Care Improvement Act Reauthorization and Extension as Enacted by the
ACA: Detailed Summary and Timeline, by Elayne J. Heisler.
76 The IHS FY2014 budget justification notes that improving the program is a top Tribal priority; see U.S. Dept. of
Health and Human Services, Indian Health Service, Fiscal Year 2014 Indian Health Service Justification of Estimates,
p. CJ-142, http://www.ihs.gov/BudgetFormulation/documents/FY2014BudgetJustification.pdf. The Senate Committee
on Indian Affairs has also held hearings on this program and noted that IHS should work to reduce the number of
denials. See U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, Access to Contract Health Services in Indian
Country, 110th Cong., 2nd sess., June 26, 2008, S.Hrg.110-519 (Washington: GPO, 2008).
77 See, for example, U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Indian Health Service, Fiscal Year 2011 Indian Health
Service Justification of Estimates, p. CJ-95, http://www.ihs.gov/NonMedicalPrograms/BudgetFormulation/documents/
IHS%20FY%202011%20Congressional%20Justification.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
30
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
governance compacts authorized by ISDEAA.78 CSC funding pays for the costs that tribes incur
for such items as financial management, accounting, training, and program start-up. Shortfalls in
funding for the CSC program have resulted in reduced services or decreased administrative
efficiency for tribes with contracts and compacts.79
Under the FY2013 sequestration operating plan, IHS’s budget authority was $175 million less
than for FY2012. This decrease was initially unexpected because, as noted in the introductory
section of this report, the BBEDCA sequestration rules include a 2% limit on cuts to IHS.80
However, OMB determined that the 2% limit only applied to IHS’s mandatory funding. The
agency’s discretionary appropriation was fully sequestrable.81 While the IHS FY2013
appropriation was above the FY2012 funding level, the sequester reduced that amount to below
the FY2012 level. Although IHS predicted that it would collect more in reimbursements in
FY2013 than it did in FY2012—an expected additional $19 million in collections—that increase
would not be sufficient to offset the amount reduced under the sequester.
FY2014 President’s Budget Request
The FY2014 President’s Budget would increase funding for IHS above both the FY2013 and
FY2012 operating levels. Specifically, it would increase funding for clinical services by $322
million; this includes an additional $100 million expected from increased collections. IHS would
use this clinical services budget increase to provide additional funds for purchased/referred care
and for preventive health services such as public health nursing and health education activities.
IHS, as a result of ACA’s implementation, is expecting increased reimbursements from
collections from Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, and other third-party insurers for services provided
at IHS-funded facilities. Specifically, IHS is expecting that collections will increase by
approximately $100 million because additional IHS-beneficiaries will be eligible for Medicaid82
and because some will enroll in private insurance offered through the exchanges established by
the ACA.83 Although not included in the IHS collections totals, IHS is to also receive collections
78 25 U.S.C. §450 et seq.
79 See U.S. General Accounting Office, Indian Self-Determination Act: Shortfalls in Indian Contract Support Costs
Need to Be Addressed, GAO/RCED-99-150, June 1999, http://www.gao.gov/archive/1999/rc99150.pdf.
80 For example, see Rob Carpiccioso, “A Miscalculation on the Sequester Has Already Harmed Indian Health,” Indian
Country, March 11, 2013, http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/03/11/miscalculation-sequester-has-
already-harmed-indian-health-148110.
81 See CRS Report R42050, Budget “Sequestration” and Selected Program Exemptions and Special Rules, coordinated
by Karen Spar.
82 This would only occur in states where the Medicaid program is expanded. See CRS Report R41210, Medicaid and
the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Provisions in ACA: Summary and Timeline, by Evelyne P.
Baumrucker et al.
83 IHS beneficiaries are exempt from the ACA requirement to have insurance coverage; however, ACA included
provisions that would make it easier for IHS beneficiaries to participate in a health insurance plan through the
exchanges. Specifically, IHS beneficiaries have a special enrollment period for health insurance plans offered through
the exchanges and, if their incomes are not more than 300% of the federal poverty level, are exempt from cost-sharing
when enrolled in a plan offered through an exchange. In addition, IHS beneficiaries, like the general population, are
eligible for income-determined subsidies to purchase insurance. A recent GAO report examined potential effects of
ACA on Medicaid and private insurance among American Indians and Alaska Natives. See U.S. Government
Accountability Office, Indian Health Service: Most American Indians and Alaska Natives Potentially Eligible for
Expanded Health Coverage, but Action Needed to Increase Enrollment, 13-553, September 5, 2013,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-553. See also CRS Report R41152, Indian Health Care: Impact of the
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
31
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).84 The agency estimates that it will receive $52
million in FY2014, but notes that this amount is uncertain because IHS only recently obtained
authority to bill the VA, and reimbursement agreements are not fully implemented.85
The FY2014 President’s Budget would also increase funding for CSCs. A 2012 Supreme Court
decision in Salazar v. Ramah Navajo86 found that lack of sufficient appropriations does not
release the federal government from its obligation to provide adequate contract support costs.87
IHS reports that it will work with Indian Tribes and Tribal Organizations to determine appropriate
CSC levels and to balance CSC priorities with any offsets in funding for direct health care
services for IHS beneficiaries.
Table 6 shows IHS funding for FY2010 through the FY2014 President’s Budget request. The
table includes funding under IHS’s discretionary budget authority, as well as mandatory
appropriations for the Special Diabetes Program for Indians88 and funds that IHS receives from
renting staff quarters and from collections from Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, and other third-party
insurers for services provided at IHS-funded facilities. Overall funding for Clinical and
Preventive Services, Other Health Services, and Health Facilities is shown in bold. Program level
funding is presented in the respective categories. Overall program level funding is summed and
presented as total program level. Collections, Rental of Staff Quarters, and mandatory funds are
subtracted from the total program level to show the discretionary budget authority (i.e.,
discretionary appropriation as provided by Congress) at the bottom of the table.
Table 6. Indian Health Service (IHS)
(Dollars in Millions)
FY2014
Program or Activity
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Request
Clinical and Preventive Services
4,139
4,171
4,335
4,230
4,564
Clinical Services
3,845a 3,877b 4,038c 3,940d 4,262e
Purchased/Referred Care (non-add)f
(779) (780) (844) (801) (879)
Preventive
Health
144 144 147 143 152
Special Diabetes Program for Indiansg
150 150 150 147 150
Other Health Services
560
559
636
603
642
(...continued)
Affordable Care Act (ACA), by Elayne J. Heisler.
84 IHS does not specify why the VA collections are not included as part of its general collection totals. It is possible that
these funds may be omitted because they are a new collection type and IHS does not yet have information on how these
funds will be used by IHS-funded facilities.
85 See U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Indian Health Service, Fiscal Year 2014 Indian Health Service
Justification of Estimates, p. CJ-142, http://www.ihs.gov/BudgetFormulation/documents/
FY2014BudgetJustification.pdf.
86 Salazar v. Ramah Navajo, No. 11-551, slip op. (June 18, 2012), available at http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/
11pdf/11-551.pdf.
87 CRS Report WSLG119, Supreme Court Holds the Government Liable for Contract Support Costs in Indian Self-
Determination Contracts Even When Congress Fails to Appropriate Adequate Funds, by Jane M. Smith.
88 P.L. 110-275, Section 303, 122 Stat. 2594; and P.L. 111-309, Section 112, 124 Stat. 3289.
Congressional Research Service
32
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
FY2014
Program or Activity
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Request
Urban
Health
Projects
43 43 43 41 43
Indian Health Professions
41
41
41
38
41
Tribal
Management/Self-Governance
9 9 9 8 9
Direct
Operations
69 69 72 68 72
Contract Support Costs
398
398
471
448
477
Health
Facilities
401 411 448 426 456
Maintenance and Improvement
60h 60h 61i 59i 61j
Sanitation Facilities Construction
96
96
80
75
80
Health Care Facilities Construction
29
39
85
77
85
Facilities/Environmental Health Support
193 193 199 194 207
Medical
Equipment
23 23 23 21 23
Total, Program Level
5,100
5,140
5,418
5,258
5,662
Less Funds from Other Sources
Col ections
891 915 954 974
1,074
Rental of Staff Quarters
6
6
8
8
8
Special Diabetes Program for Indiansf
150 150 150 147 150
Total, Discretionary Budget Authority
4,052
4,069
4,306
4,131
4,431
Sources: The amounts for FY2010, FY2011, FY2012, and FY2014 are taken from the FY2012, FY2013, and
FY2014 congressional budget justification documents. Funding amounts for FY2013 reflect sequestration and are
taken from the IHS FY2013 Sequestration Operation Plan. These documents are available at http://www.hhs.gov/
budget/.
Notes: Individual amounts may not add to subtotals or totals due to rounding.
a. Includes $891 million received in collections from Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, private insurance, and other
programs.
b. Includes $915 million received in collections from Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, private insurance, and other
programs.
c. Includes $954 million received in collections from Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, private insurance, and other
programs.
d. Includes $974 million that IHS estimates it will receive in col ections from Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, private
insurance, and other programs.
e. Includes $1,074 million that IHS estimates it will receive in collections from Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP,
private insurance, and other programs.
f.
This was previously referred to as “Contract Health Services.”
g. These are appropriated funds made available to IHS for the Special Diabetes Program for Indians authorized
by PHSA Sec. 330C.
h. Includes $6 million that IHS received from rental of staff quarters.
i.
Includes $8 million that IHS received from rental of staff quarters.
j.
Includes $8 million that IHS estimates the agency will receive from rental of staff quarters.
Congressional Research Service
33
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
Agency Overview
NIH is the primary agency of the federal government charged with performing and supporting
biomedical and behavioral research. Its activities cover a wide range of basic, clinical, and
translational research, as well as research training and health information collection and
dissemination. The agency is organized into 27 research institutes and centers, headed by the NIH
Director. The Office of the Director (OD) sets overall policy for NIH and coordinates the
programs and activities of all NIH components, particularly in areas of research that involve
multiple institutes. The institutes and centers (collectively called ICs) focus on particular diseases,
areas of human health and development, or aspects of research support. Each IC plans and
manages its own research programs in coordination with the Office of the Director.
The bulk of NIH’s budget, about 83%, goes out to the extramural research community through
grants, contracts, and other awards. The funding supports research performed by more than
300,000 non-federal scientists and technical personnel who work at more than 2,500 universities,
hospitals, medical schools, and other research institutions around the country and abroad.89 A
smaller proportion of the budget, about 11%, supports the intramural research programs of the
NIH institutes and centers, funding research performed by NIH scientists and non-employee
trainees in the NIH laboratories and Clinical Center. The remaining 6% funds various research
management, support, and facilities’ needs.
NIH derives its statutory authority from the PHSA. Title III, Section 301 of the PHSA grants the
Secretary of HHS broad permanent authority to conduct and sponsor research. In addition, Title
IV, “National Research Institutes,” authorizes in greater detail various activities, functions, and
responsibilities of the NIH Director and the institutes and centers. All of the ICs are covered by
specific provisions in the PHSA, but they vary considerably in the amount of detail included in
the statutory language. There are few time-and-dollar authorization levels specified for individual
activities. Congress authorized a significant reorganization of IC responsibilities in the FY2012
Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 112-74, Division F) by creating a new National Center for
Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) and dissolving the National Center for Research
Resources (NCRR). Activities relating to translational sciences from NCRR and many other ICs
were consolidated in NCATS, and NCRR’s other programs were moved to several other ICs and
OD.
As shown in Table 7, the annual Labor-HHS-ED appropriations act provides separate
appropriations to 24 of the ICs, the OD, and the Buildings and Facilities account. NIH receives
additional funds from the Interior/Environment appropriations act and from a mandatory
appropriation for type 1 diabetes research.
89 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, FY2014 Budget in Brief, April 10, 2013, p. 34, http://www.hhs.gov/
budget/fy2014/fy-2014-budget-in-brief.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
34
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
FY2010-FY2013 Funding
In program level funding, the FY2010 total of $31.243 billion for NIH was higher than funding in
each of the three following years. Program level funding declined by $317 million (1.0%) from
FY2010 to FY2011 under the full-year continuing resolution (P.L. 112-10). Funding further
decreased by $66 million (0.2%) to $30.860 billion in FY2012. Under the FY2013 operating plan
(after sequestration and transfers), program level funding was $1.709 billion (5.5%) lower than
FY2012.90
The ICs have shared about equally in the increases and decreases each year. A few programs that
were moved in the NCATS/NCRR reorganization have received additional emphasis, and an HHS
initiative on Alzheimer’s disease research has brought additional funding to the National Institute
on Aging (NIA). In FY2013, the initial enacted appropriation in P.L. 113-6 gave NIH a slight
increase over FY2012 by adding funding for the OD. The March 2013 sequestration, however,
reduced each NIH account by about 5%, and an HHS transfer under the Secretary’s authority
resulted in a further reduction of $173 million (about 0.55% from each IC and a larger amount
from OD).
The main funding mechanism for supporting extramural research is research project grants
(RPGs), which are competitive, peer-reviewed, and largely investigator-initiated. In FY2012, NIH
supported a total of 36,259 RPGs, including 8,986 in the “new and competing awards” category.
The NIH FY2013 operating plan predicts spending 6.0% less on 34,902 RPGs (3.7% fewer),
including 8,283 competing awards, a decrease of 703 competing grants (7.8% fewer).91
FY2014 President’s Budget Request92
The FY2014 President’s Budget requests a program level total of $31.331 billion for NIH, $471
million (1.5%) more than the comparable FY2012 amount of $30.860 billion and an increase of
$2.180 billion (7.5%) above the FY2013 level of $29.151 billion. Most of the institutes and ICs
would receive increases in the request compared to FY2013, with selected exceptions reflecting
program priorities and new initiatives. For example, about $40 million is requested for the
recently-announced BRAIN initiative (Brain Research through Application of Innovative
Neurotechnologies) to develop new tools for study of complex brain functions.
The FY2014 budget request for NCATS is $666 million, an increase of $124 million (23%) over
its FY2013 budget. NIH estimates it will increase its overall spending on Alzheimer’s disease
(AD) research in FY2014 by about 12% from FY2012. The request for the National Institute on
Aging is $153 million (15%) above FY2013. The National Library of Medicine (NLM) would
receive an increase in the request for its data-handling responsibilities, but the increase is smaller
90 The FY2010 and FY2011 appropriations included about $300 million each that did not remain with NIH. Funds for
the U.S. contribution to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria were appropriated to NIH (in the
account for NIAID, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases) but were then transferred to non-HHS
agencies that manage overseas assistance programs. Since FY2012 Congress has appropriated Global Fund money
directly to the relevant agencies.
91 For further information, see NIH, “Fact Sheet: Impact of Sequestration on the National Institutes of Health,” news
release, June 3, 2013, http://www.nih.gov/news/health/jun2013/nih-03.htm.
92 For additional details, see the NIH section of CRS Report R43086, Federal Research and Development Funding:
FY2014 , coordinated by John F. Sargent Jr.
Congressional Research Service
35
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
than it would appear from Table 7. For several years, all the ICs have transferred funds from their
appropriations to NLM to help cover some shared expenses (for example, in FY2012 the transfers
totaled over $27 million). The request proposes that those funds be directly appropriated to NLM.
Table 7 shows funding for NIH accounts for FY2010 through the FY2014 request. FY2012 was
the first year in which the NCATS/NCRR reorganization took effect. Program level funding from
all accounts is summed and presented as total program level. Mandatory funds and transfers are
subtracted from the total program level to show the discretionary budget authority (i.e.,
discretionary appropriation as provided by Congress) at the bottom of the table. For more
information on the PHS Evaluation Set-Aside transfer, see that section in the front matter of this
report.93
Table 7. National Institutes of Health (NIH)
(Dollars in Millions)
FY2014
Institutes and Centers (ICs)
FY2010a
FY2011b
FY2012c
FY2013
Request
Cancer
(NCI)
5,098 5,059 5,067 4,779 5,126
Heart/Lung/Blood
(NHLBI)
3,094 3,070 3,076 2,901 3,099
Dental/Craniofacial
Research
(NIDCR)
413 410 410 387 412
Diabetes/Digestive/Kidney (NIDDK)d
1,959 1,942 1,945 1,836 1,962
Neurological
Disorders/Stroke
(NINDS)
1,634 1,622 1,625 1,532 1,643
Allergy/Infectious Diseases (NIAID)e
4,815 4,776 4,486 4,231 4,579
General
Medical
Sciences
(NIGMS)
2,048 2,034 2,428 2,291 2,401
Child Health/Human Development (NICHD)
1,327
1,318
1,320
1,245
1,339
Eye
(NEI)
706 701 702 662 699
Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS),
L-HHS
appropriation
695 684 685 646 691
NIEHS, Interior/Environmentf
79 79 79 75 79
Aging
(NIA)
1,108 1,100 1,121 1,040 1,193
Arthritis/Musculoskeletal/Skin
(NIAMS)
538 534 535 505 541
Deafness/Communication
Disorders
(NIDCD) 418 415 416 392 423
Nursing
Research
(NINR)
145 144 145 136 146
Alcohol
Abuse/Alcoholism
(NIAAA)
462 458 459 433 464
Drug
Abuse
(NIDA)
1,067 1,051 1,052 993 1,072
Mental Health (NIMH)g
1,494 1,477 1,479 1,395 1,466
Human Genome Research (NHGRI)
524
511
513
483
517
Biomedical
Imaging/Bioengineering
(NIBIB)
316 314 338 319 339
93 For further background on NIH, see CRS Report R41705, The National Institutes of Health (NIH): Organization,
Funding, and Congressional Issues, by Judith A. Johnson and Pamela W. Smith, and for current funding information,
see the NIH section of CRS Report R43086, Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014 , coordinated by
John F. Sargent Jr.
Congressional Research Service
36
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
FY2014
Institutes and Centers (ICs)
FY2010a
FY2011b
FY2012c
FY2013
Request
Complementary/Alternative
Med
(NCCAM) 129 128 128 121 129
Minority Health/Health Disparities (NIMHD)
211
210
276
260
283
Fogarty International Center (FIC)
70
69
70
66
73
[former] Ctr for Research Resources (NCRR)
1,267
1,258
—
—
—
Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS)
—
—
575
542
666
National Library of Medicine (NLM)h
349 345 346 326 390
Office of Director (OD)
1,177
1,167
1,459
1,436
1,473
Buildings & Facilities (B&F)
100
50
125
118
126
Total, Program Level
31,243
30,926
30,860
29,151
31,331
Less Funds From Other Sources
PHS Evaluation Funds (NLM)
8
8
8
8
8
Type 1 Diabetes Research (NIDDK)d
150 150 150 142 150
Total, Discretionary Budget Authority
31,084
30,767
30,702
29,001
31,173
Sources: Funding amounts for FY2010 are taken from the NIH FY2012 congressional budget justification.
Amounts for FY2011 are from the FY2013 justification. Amounts for FY2012 and the FY2014 request are from
the FY2014 justification, available (along with older years) at http://officeofbudget.od.nih.gov/. Funding amounts
for FY2013 reflect sequestration and are from the NIH Sequestration Operating Plan, available at
http://officeofbudget.od.nih.gov/pdfs/FY14/POST%20ONLINE_NIH.pdf.
Notes: FY2010 through FY2013 IC and NLM amounts are not comparable to FY2014 as they do not reflect
transfers from ICs to NLM. FY2010 and FY2011 are not adjusted for comparability for the NCATS/NCRR
reorganization. Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
a. FY2010 reflects real transfer of $1 million from HHS Office of the Secretary to NIMH, $4.6 million transfer
to HRSA Ryan White program (Secretary’s authority), and transfers among ICs for the Genes, Environment,
and Health Initiative (NIH Director’s authority).
b. FY2011 reflects real transfer of almost $1 million from HHS Office of the Secretary to NIMH for the
Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee.
c. FY2012 reflects Secretary’s transfer of $8.727 million to HRSA for Ryan White AIDS and Secretary’s net
transfer of $18.273 million for Alzheimer’s disease research to NIA from other ICs.
d. NIDDK program level includes mandatory funds for type 1 diabetes research appropriated in PHSA Sec.
330B (provided by P.L. 110-275, P.L. 111-309, and P.L. 112-240). Funds have been appropriated through
FY2014.
e. FY2010 and FY2011 amounts include funds appropriated to NIAID for transfer to the Global Fund to Fight
AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria ($300 million in FY2010 and $297.3 million in FY2011, see footnote 88 in
text). BioShield transfer of $304 mil ion provided in FY2010 was not provided under the FY2011
appropriation.
f.
This is a separate account in the Interior/Environment appropriations act for NIEHS research activities
related to Superfund.
g. The FY2014 request proposes shifting a $27 million program on HIV/AIDS behavioral health research from
NIMH to NIAID.
h. NLM program level includes $8.2 million transferred from PHS Evaluation Funds each year.
Congressional Research Service
37
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMHSA)
Agency Overview
SAMHSA is the lead federal agency for increasing access to behavioral health services.94 It
supports community-based mental health and substance abuse treatment and prevention services
through formula grants to the states and U.S. territories and through numerous competitive grant
programs to states, territories, tribal organizations, local communities, and private entities. Under
SAMHSA’ s charitable choice provisions, religious organizations are eligible to receive funding
in order to provide substance abuse services without altering their religious character. The agency
also collects information on the incidence and prevalence of mental illness and substance abuse at
the national and state levels.
SAMHSA and most of its programs and activities are authorized under PHSA Title V. However,
the agency’s two largest programs, the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment (SAPT) block
grant and the Community Mental Health Services (CMHS) block grant, which together accounted
for 64% of SAMHSA’s program-level funding in FY2013, are separately authorized under PHSA
Title XIX, Part B.
Under PHSA Title V, SAMHSA is organized into three centers: the Center for Mental Health
Services (CMHS), the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT), and the Center for
Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP). Each center has general statutory authority, called
Programs of Regional and National Significance (PRNS), under which it has established grant
programs for states and communities to address their important substance abuse and mental
health needs. PRNS authorizes each center to fund projects that (1) translate promising new
research findings to community-based prevention and treatment services; (2) provide training and
technical assistance; and (3) target resources to increase service capacity where it is most needed.
In addition, PHSA Title V authorizes a number of specific grant programs, referred to as
categorical grants. The PHSA also directs SAMHSA to conduct data collection and analysis
activities related to mental health and substance abuse; for example, SAMHSA administers the
National Survey on Drug Use and Health (an annual survey that collects information about
substance use and related health topics) and publishes analyses of the survey data.
Most SAMHSA programs are administered by one of the three centers and focus on mental
health, substance abuse treatment, or substance abuse prevention. Some programs receive support
from more than one center; for example, CMHS and CSAT both support SAMHSA’s Behavioral
Health Treatment Court Collaboratives. Additional activities that fall outside the three centers
(e.g., collecting information on the incidence and prevalence of mental illness and substance
abuse) are categorized under health surveillance and program support.
94 Unless otherwise noted, information in this section is summarized from CRS Report R41477, Substance Abuse and
Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA): Agency Overview and Reauthorization Issues, by C. Stephen
Redhead.
Congressional Research Service
38
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Congress has not taken up comprehensive legislation to reauthorize SAMHSA since 2000, when
the agency and its programs were last reauthorized as part of the Children’s Health Act.95
However, Congress has added some new authorities to Title V and otherwise expanded
SAMHSA’s programs and activities in the past decade. Although authorizations of appropriations
for most of SAMHSA’s grant programs expired at the end of FY2003, many of these programs
continue to receive annual appropriations.
FY2010-FY2013 Funding
From FY2010 through FY2013, SAMHSA’s program-level funding decreased from $3.583
billion to $3.355 billion (a change of $228 million, or 6.4%); SAMHSA’s budget authority,
excluding PHS evaluation set-aside funds and PPHF transfers, decreased from $3.431 billion in
FY2010 to $3.211 billion in FY2013 (a change of $220 million, or 6.4%).
In the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 (P.L. 112-74) and the accompanying conference
report,96 Congress rejected changes SAMHSA proposed to its budget structure in the FY2012
budget request. Among other proposed changes, the FY2012 budget request would have
combined most of the existing PRNS in the three centers into a single account for Innovation and
Emerging Issues. Congress directed that future budget requests reflect the structure of the three
centers, as well as an account labeled Health Surveillance and Program Support to fund “program
support and cross-cutting activities that supplement activities funded under [the three centers,
and] to carry out national surveys on drug abuse and mental health, to collect and analyze
program data, and to conduct public awareness and technical assistance activities.”97 SAMHSA’s
FY2013 and FY2014 budget requests have reflected the structure requested by Congress in P.L.
112-74.
FY2014 President’s Budget Request
The FY2014 request would return SAMHSA’s budget authority ($3.348 billion) and program-
level funding ($3.572 billion) to approximately the FY2012 amounts (with less than 0.1%
difference). Relative to SAMSHA’s FY2012 budget, the FY2014 request would decrease funding
for CSAT (by $75 million) and CSAP (by $10 million) and increase funding for CMHS (by $40
million) and health surveillance and program support (by $49 million). The proposed decrease in
CSAT funding reflects a reduction in CSAT’s PRNS funding (by $94 million) that is partially
offset by an increase in CSAT’s block grant funding (by $20 million). The proposed decrease in
CSAP funding reflects a reduction in CSAP’s PRNS funding (by $10 million). The proposed
increase in CMHS funding reflects an increase in CMHS’s PRNS funding (by $40 million). The
proposed increase in health surveillance and program support funding primarily reflects an
increase in funding for agency-wide initiatives (by $51 million).
Table 8 presents SAMHSA funding from FY2010 through the FY2014 President’s Budget
request. Overall program level funding is shown in bold for each major budget account.
Discretionary budget authority, mandatory funds, user fees, and other sources of funding
including transfers are provided. Overall program level funding for each account is summed and
95 P.L. 106-310, Titles XXXI-XXXIV.
96 H.Rept. 112-331.
97 P.L. 112-74; 125 Stat. 1074.
Congressional Research Service
39
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
presented as total program level. Transfers, user fees, and mandatory funds are subtracted from
the total program level to show the agency’s discretionary budget authority (i.e., discretionary
appropriation as provided by Congress) at the bottom of the table. For a detailed discussion of the
funding concepts noted in the table, see the discussions in Appendix C and “PHS Program
Evaluation Set-Aside” in this report.
Table 8. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
(Dollars in Millions)
FY2014
Program or Activity
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013 Request
Center for Mental Health Services (CMHS)
1,005
1,022
999
915
1,039
Mental Health Block Grant
421
420
460
437
460
PHS Evaluation Funds (non-add)
(21) (21) (21) (21) (21)
Programs of Regional and National Significance
361
384
321
271
361
PPHF Transfer (non-add)
(20) (45) (45) — (28)
Children’s Mental Health Services
121
118
117
111
117
PATH Homeless Formula Grant
65
65
65
61
65
Protection & Advocacy Formula Grant
36
36
36
34
36
Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT)
2,253
1,871
2,230
2,115
2,155
Substance Abuse Block Grant (SAPT)
1,799
1,783
1,800
1,710
1,820
PHS Evaluation Funds (non-add)
(79) (79) (79) (79) (72)
Programs of Regional and National Significance
452
429
429
405
335
PHS Evaluation Funds (non-add)
(9) (2) (2) (2) —
PPHF Transfer (non-add)
— (2) (29) — 30
Prescription Drug Monitoring (NASPER)a
2 — — — —
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
202
186
186
176
176
Programs of Regional and National Significance
202
186
186
176
176
Health Surveillance and Program Support
102
177
154
149
203
Health Surveillance and Program Support
102 171 124 123 120
PHS Evaluation Funds (non-add)
(23) (29) (27) (27) (45)
PPHF Transfer (non-add)
— (25) (18) (15) —
Public Awareness and Support
—
—
14
14
14
Congressional Research Service
40
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
FY2014
Program or Activity
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013 Request
PHS Evaluation Funds (non-add)
—
—
—
— (14)
Performance and Quality Information Systems
—
—
13
9
13
PHS Evaluation Funds (non-add)
—
—
—
— (13)
Agency-Wide
Initiatives
— 5 3 3 54
Data Request and Publications User Feesb
— — — — 2
St. Elizabeths Hospitalc
1 — — — —
Total, Program Level
3,583
3,599
3,569
3,355
3,572
Less Funds From Other Sources
PHS Evaluation Funds
132 132 130 130 165
PPHF Transfers
20 88 92 15 58
Data Request and Publications User Fees
— — — — 2
Total, Discretionary Budget Authority
3,431
3,380
3,347
3,211
3,348
Sources: The amounts for FY2010, FY2011, FY2012, and FY2014 are taken from the FY2012, FY2013, and
FY2014 congressional budget justification documents. Funding amounts for FY2013 reflect sequestration and are
taken from the SAMHSA FY2013 Sequestration Operation Plan. These documents are available at
http://www.hhs.gov/budget/.
Notes: Individual amounts may not add to subtotals or totals due to rounding.
a. The FY2011 ful -year continuing resolution (P.L. 112-10) prohibited the funding of grants original y
authorized under the National Al Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting Act of 2005 (NASPER, P.L.
109-60) and first funded in FY2009. These grants have not been funded since FY2010. See CRS Report
R42593, Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs, by Kristin Finklea, Erin Bagalman, and Lisa N. Sacco.
b. SAMHSA has requested authority to seek $1.5 million in Data Request and Publications User Fees, which
would be collected for extraordinary requests that SAMHSA would not otherwise be able to fulfill using
existing resources.
c. Upon the transfer of the West Campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital from HHS to the General Services
Administration (GSA) in 2004, HHS and GSA signed a Memorandum of Agreement that required (among
other things) HHS to pay for remediation (clean-up) of hazardous substances found on the site after the
date of transfer. Funding for this purpose has not been needed since FY2010.
Congressional Research Service
41
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Appendix A. American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act (ARRA): FY2009 Supplemental Appropriations
Through ARRA, Congress appropriated a total of $22.4 billion in supplemental FY2009
discretionary appropriations for health and human services programs administered by HHS. Of
that total amount, $15.1 billion was provided directly to, or allocated for, programs and activities
administered by, the PHS agencies (see text box below).98 Generally, the discretionary funds
appropriated under ARRA were intended to be time-limited. In most instances the funding was to
remain available for obligation through the end of FY2010 (i.e., September 30, 2010). To date,
essentially all the ARRA discretionary funds provided to HHS have been obligated.99
ARRA: FY2009 Supplemental Discretionary Appropriations for PHS Programs
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ): $1.1 billion
These funds were used to support comparative effectiveness research (now called patient-centered outcomes
research). Of the total amount: $300 million was administered by AHRQ; $400 million was transferred to NIH; and
the remaining $400 million was allocated at the discretion of the HHS Secretary and used primarily to develop the
infrastructure for comparative effectiveness research.
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA): $2.5 billion
These funds were used to support HRSA programs as follows: $1.5 billion for health center construction, renovation,
equipment, and health information technology (HIT); $500 million to support new health center delivery sites and
service areas and expand services at existing sites; $300 million for the National Health Service Corps; and $200
million for HRSA’s health workforce programs.
Indian Health Service (IHS): $500 million
These funds were used to support the following IHS facility and infrastructure projects: $227 million for health
facilities construction; $100 million for maintenance and improvement; $85 million for HIT activities; $68 million for
sanitation facilities construction; and $20 million for health equipment, including HIT. [Note: IHS received an
additional $90 million in ARRA discretionary funds from the Environmental Protection Agency for sanitation facilities
construction.]
National Institutes of Health (NIH): $10 billion
These funds were used to support NIH activities as follows: $8.2 billion for intramural and extramural scientific
research; $1.3 billion for extramural research facility construction, renovation, and equipment; and $500 million for
the construction, repair, and improvement of NIH’s facilities. NIH also received a transfer of $400 million from
AHRQ for comparative effectiveness research (see above).
Prevention and Wellness Fund: $1 billion
These funds were used as follows: $300 million for CDC’s immunization program; $50 million for CDC and CMS to
support state and local efforts to reduce health care-associated infections; and $650 million for CDC to support an
evidence-based clinical and community-based prevention and wellness program—Communities Putting Prevention to
Work (CPPW)—focused on increasing levels of physical activity, improving nutrition, reducing obesity rates, and
decreasing smoking prevalence and exposure to secondhand smoke.
98 P.L. 111-5, 123 Stat. 115. The HHS appropriations were included in Title VIII (Labor-HHS-ED) of Division A of
ARRA. In addition to these discretionary appropriations, ARRA included several HHS mandatory spending provisions.
For more information, see CRS Report R40537, American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5):
Summary and Legislative History, by Clinton T. Brass et al.
99 HHS maintains a Recovery Act website at http://www.hhs.gov/recovery/. It includes detailed implementation plans
for all the ARRA-funded programs, up-to-date information on ARRA obligations and outlays (by state), and links to
the Recovery Act websites maintained by individual HHS agencies.
Congressional Research Service
42
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Appendix B. Community Health Center Fund
ACA Section 10503 established a Community Health Center Fund (CHCF) to provide
supplemental funding for health center operations and the National Health Service Corps
(NHSC). The law provided annual appropriations to the CHCF totaling $11 billion over the five-
year period of FY2011 through FY2015. Despite the title of the fund, which only refers to
community health centers, the CHCF supports funding for four types of health centers:
community health centers, migrant health centers, health centers for the homeless, and health
centers for residents of public housing. ACA Section 10503 also included a separate appropriation
of $1.5 billion, available for the period FY2011 through FY2015, for health center construction
and renovation. These funds are separate from the CHCF and are not included in Table B-1.
ACA also included a provision that required that the CHCF be used to increase funding for the
health centers program and the NHSC above FY2008 funding levels. P.L. 112-10, which provided
full year appropriations for FY2011, eliminated this requirement for FY2011, thus allowing
CHCF funds to be used to either supplement or replace annual appropriations for health centers
and the NHSC. FY2011, FY2012, and FY2013 annual appropriations for health centers and the
NHSC were below the FY2008 funding level. This is also the case under the FY2014 President’s
Budget request. In addition, since FY2012, the NHSC has not received annual discretionary
appropriations. Similarly, the FY2014 President’s Budget request would also eliminate the
program’s annual discretionary appropriations. Instead, in each of these years, funds from the
CHCF made up—or, in the case of FY2014, would make up—the entirety of the NHSC’s budget.
Table B-1 summarizes the amounts appropriated to the CHCF and the allocation of funds for
each of the five fiscal years.
CHCF funds for community and migrant health centers were reduced by 2% for FY2013 under
the BCA sequester; the remaining funds (those for other health center types and for the NHSC)
were reduced at 5.1%, the percentage that OMB determined would apply to mandatory funds.100
Table B-1. Community Health Center Fund, FY2011-FY2015
(Dollars in Millions)
Program
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2015
Total
Health Center Program
1,000
1,200
1,500a 2,200 3,600 9,500
National Health Service Corps
290
295
300b 305 310 1,500
Total
1,290
1,495
1,800
2,505
3,910
11,000
Source: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of (ACA; P.L. 111-148, as amended).
a. This amount was reduced to $1,465 million by sequestration.
b. This amount was reduced to $285 million by sequestration.
100 Discretionary funds for the health center program were reduced by 5% for FY2013. For more information, see CRS
Report R42050, Budget “Sequestration” and Selected Program Exemptions and Special Rules, coordinated by Karen
Spar. For information on the OMB report see OMB Report to the Congress on the Joint Committee Sequestration for
Fiscal Year 2013, March 1, 2013: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/
fy13ombjcsequestrationreport.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
43
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Appendix C. Prevention and Public Health Fund
(PPHF)
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) established the Prevention and Public
Health Fund (PPHF) and provided it with a permanent annual appropriation.101 PPHF funds are to
be transferred by the HHS Secretary for prevention, wellness, and public health activities.
ACA appropriated increasing amounts to the PPHF for FY2010 through FY2014, and $2 billion
per fiscal year in perpetuity thereafter. In February 2012, through the Middle Class Tax Relief and
Job Creation Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-96, Section 3205), Congress amended the PPHF authority,
decreasing the appropriated amounts from FY2013 through FY2021 as part of a package of
offsets to partly cover the costs of the law. (These costs included, among other things, extending
certain unemployment and Medicare programs.) Original appropriations to the PPHF in ACA and
current-law amounts are presented in Table C-1. Note that PPHF amounts for FY2013 through
FY2021 are subject to sequestration under the Budget Control Act (BCA, P.L. 112-25).102
Table C-1. PPHF Appropriations Under ACA and Current Law
(Dollars in Millions)
Total Appropriation
ACA
Current
Fiscal Year
(P.L. 111-148)
Lawa
2010 500
500
2011 750
750
2012 1,000
1,000
2013 1,250
949b
2014 1,500 1,000c
2015 2,000 1,000c
2016 2,000 1,000c
2017 2,000 1,000c
2018 2,000 1,250c
2019 2,000 1,250c
2020 2,000 1,500c
2021 2,000 1,500c
2022 and each
2,000 2,000
subsequent FY
Source: Prepared by Congressional Research Service.
a. ACA, as amended by P.L. 112-96, the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Sec. 3205.
101 ACA Section 4002; 42 U.S.C. §300u-11.
102 CRS Report R42050, Budget “Sequestration” and Selected Program Exemptions and Special Rules, coordinated by
Karen Spar.
Congressional Research Service
44
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
b. Reflects reduction to $1 billion under P.L. 112-96, and cancellation of 5.1% ($51 million) of FY2013
budgetary resources under Budget Control Act (BCA) sequestration for nonexempt nondefense mandatory
programs, as of March 1, 2013. For background on BCA sequestration, see CRS Report R42050, Budget
“Sequestration” and Selected Program Exemptions and Special Rules, coordinated by Karen Spar.
c. Amounts through FY2021 are subject to BCA sequestration in amounts determined by the White House
Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
PPHF funds are available to the HHS Secretary on October 1 of each year, when each new fiscal
year begins. As a result, the Administration’s annual budget proposals for the PPHF reflect not the
Administration’s request for the funds, but rather its intended distribution and use of the funds.
The distribution of PPHF funds to various HHS agencies for FY2010 through the FY2014
President’s budget proposal is presented in Table C-2. Further details regarding PPHF
distributions to AHRQ, CDC, HRSA, and SAMHSA are provided in the respective agency budget
tables in the body of this report.103
Table C-2. PPHF Transfers to HHS Agencies, FY2010-FY2014
(Dollars in Millions)
Agency
Agency
FY2014
Total,
Total (%),
Agency
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013a
Proposalb
FY10-FY14 FY10-FY14
AHRQ 6
12
12
7
0
36
0.9
AoA/ACL
0 0 20 9 25 54 1.3
CDC
192 611 809 463 755 2,830 67.4
CMS 0
0
0
454c 0
454c 10.8
HRSA
271 20 37 2 57 387 9.2
OS
12 19 30 0 105 166 4.0
SAMHSA
20 88 92 15 58 273 6.5
Total
500
750
1,000
949
1,000
4,199
100.0
Sources: Prepared by Congressional Research Service based on HHS agency congressional budget justifications
for FY2012 through FY2014, http://www.hhs.gov/budget/; and HHS, “Prevention and Public Health Fund,” funding
distribution tables, http://www.hhs.gov/open/recordsandreports/prevention/index.html.
Notes: Individual amounts may not add to totals due to rounding. Acronyms are as fol ows: AHRQ is the
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, AoA is the Administration on Aging, ACL is the Administration for
Community Living, CDC is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, CMS is the Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services, HRSA is the Health Resources and Services Administration, OS is the Office of the HHS
Secretary, and SAMHSA is the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
a. Amounts reflect cancellation of $51 million in budgetary resources under FY2013 sequestration.
b. Distribution proposed by the Administration. This is not a budget request, as PPHF funds have already been
appropriated. Amounts do not reflect FY2014 sequestration that may be required under current law.
c. According to HHS, funds are for “Health Insurance Enrol ment Support” for implementation of insurance
exchanges under ACA, “[t]o invest in health insurance enrol ment support specifically through activities that
will assist with eligibility determinations which are in need of intervention and activities to make people
aware of insurance options and enrollment assistance available to them.”
Scope of PPHF-Funded Activities
103 See also references to the PPHF in text and tables in CRS Report RL33880, Funding for the Older Americans Act
and Other Aging Services Programs, by Angela Napili and Kirsten J. Colello.
Congressional Research Service
45
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
The terms “prevention,” “wellness,” and “public health activities,” which describe allowable
PPHF-funded activities, are not defined in the PHSA, ACA, or elsewhere in federal law. ACA
was not accompanied by committee reports in either chamber. Finally, HHS has not published
regulations, guidance, or other information to clarify the department’s views about the types of
activities that are within scope for PPHF funding.104
HHS recently published an annual report to Congress on PPHF spending for FY2012, as required
by law.105 The report notes spending (typically through grants or contracts) on the following types
of activities, among others: (1) community prevention activities to improve health and reduce
chronic disease risk factors, to reduce tobacco use, and to improve fitness and reduce obesity; (2)
clinical prevention activities to improve access to important preventive services and definitive
care for a variety of health needs; (3) behavioral health screening and integration with primary
care; (4) public health infrastructure, workforce, and training; and (5) public health research and
data collection. As shown in Table C-2, more than two-thirds of PPHF funds have been
distributed to CDC.
Members of Congress hold a variety of views about the PPHF.106 The Fund’s proponents often
support an expanded view of the role of public health in addressing so-called social or non-
medical determinants of health, such as behavior, socioeconomic status, and the environment.107
They see the PPHF as a means to enable communities to expand their public health efforts in
order to control the chronic disease burdens that affect them. Others have objected to this
approach; some criticize the use of the PPHF for public works projects such as playgrounds and
bike lanes, while others charge that a federal role in behavior modification is inappropriate and
intrusive.
In April 2013, HHS announced its intention to transfer $454 million—almost half of the $949
million available for FY2013—to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to help
pay for ongoing ACA implementation activities, including the establishment of the federally
facilitated exchanges, as well as consumer education and outreach.108 Congress did not provide
CMS with the additional discretionary funding that it requested for ACA implementation in
FY2013. The plan to transfer PPHF funds to CMS was criticized by supporters of the Fund.109 As
shown in Table C-2, each HHS agency that received a PPHF transfer in FY2012 received
substantially less from the PPHF for FY2013, largely as a result of the transfer to CMS.
104 For more information about federal prevention activities and how they may be defined, see Government
Accountability Office, Available Information on Federal Spending, Cost Savings, and International Comparisons Has
Limitations, GAO-13-49, December 6, 2012, http://gao.gov/products/GAO-13-49.
105 HHS, “The Affordable Care Act and the Prevention and Public Health Fund: Report to Congress for FY2012,”
undated, http://www.hhs.gov/open/recordsandreports/prevention/fy2012_aca_rpt_to_congress.pdf.
106 Unless otherwise noted, information in this paragraph is drawn from: Michael Kranish, “In Health Bill, Billions for
Parks, Paths,” The Boston Globe, July 9, 2009; John Reichard, “Whither the Overhaul Law’s Prevention Fund?,” CQ
HealthBeat News, January 6, 2011; and Jennifer Haberkorn, “The Prevention and Public Health Fund,” Health Affairs,
Health Policy Brief, February 23, 2012. In the 112th Congress, the House passed H.R. 1217, a bill to repeal the PPHF.
A similar bill, H.R. 1099, has been introduced in the House in the 113th Congress. Comparable bills have not advanced
in the Senate.
107 For more information, see Michele J. Orza, High Hopes: Public Health Approaches to Reducing the Need for
Health Care, National Health Policy Forum, September 27, 2010, http://www.nhpf.org/library/details.cfm/2833.
108 Rachana Dixit, “HHS Sets Aside $454 Million In Prevention Funds For Insurance Enrollment Support,”
InsideHealthPolicy, April 16, 2013.
109 John Reichard, “HHS Draws $304 Million from Prevention Fund to Enroll Uninsured,” CQ HealthBeat News, April
12, 2013.
Congressional Research Service
46
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Relationship to Annual Appropriations
In some cases, the Secretary has used, or proposed to use, PPHF funds to augment funds from
annual discretionary appropriations. For example, for FY2013, the Administration proposed using
the PPHF to fund almost the entire budget of the CDC Center on Birth Defects and
Developmental Disabilities.110 If PPHF funds were to become unavailable, appropriators would
face a need to provide additional regular appropriations in order to sustain programmatic
activities.111
Recent funding trends for the CDC Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion account
illustrate this point. This account has received sizeable PPHF distributions since funds first
became available for FY2010. As shown in Figure C-1, budget authority for the account
decreased overall from FY2009 (before PPHF funds were available) through the FY2014 request.
However, the program level increased from FY2010 through FY2012, due to the increasing
transfers of PPHF funds. The program level then decreased for FY2013. This was due in part to
the decrease in budget authority (BA) as a result of rescission and sequestration, but in larger part
to the reduced PPHF transfer that, as discussed above, resulted from the large PPHF transfer to
CMS. Ultimately, the CMS transfer had a greater effect on the operating budget for CDC Chronic
Disease Prevention and Health Promotion activities than did sequestration.
110 CDC, Justification of Estimates for Congressional Committees, FY2013, February, 2012, p. 153,
http://www.cdc.gov/fmo.
111 John Reichard, “Advocates: CDC, Other Agencies Face Big Cuts Fast if Prevention Fund Ends,” CQ HealthBeat,
June 18, 2012.
Congressional Research Service
47
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Figure C-1. Funding for CDC Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion,
FY2008-FY2014
Dollars in millions
Sources: Prepared by Congressional Research Service from CDC, Justification of Estimates for Congressional
Committees, FY2013, p. 120, and FY2014, p. 138, and CDC FY2013 operating plan, al at http://www.cdc.gov/fmo;
and CDC Office of the Chief Operating Officer, June 13, 2013.
Notes: Column totals are program levels. Amounts for FY2008 and FY2009 have not been made comparable to
subsequent years which reflect a FY2010 budget realignment. FY2012 and FY2013 amounts have been made
comparable to FY2014 to reflect a planned budget realignment for the Working Capital Fund. ARRA is the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. (See CRS Report R40181, Selected Health Funding in the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, coordinated by C. Stephen Redhead.) PPHF is the ACA
Prevention and Public Health Fund. BA is budget authority. The BA amount presented for FY2013 reflects
cancellation of $38.1 million due to sequestration, and addition of $22.7 million through a one-time transfer from
other HHS agencies, under the HHS Secretary’s general transfer authority.
Congressional Research Service
48
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Appendix D. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Trust Fund
ACA Section 6301(e) established the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund (PCORTF)
to receive funds to support comparative clinical effectiveness research (CER) and dissemination
of its results at both HHS and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI).112
Sources of monies to PCORTF include (1) annual appropriations; (2) fees on health insurance and
self-insured plans; and (3) transfers from the Medicare Part A and Part B Trust Funds.
Specifically, ACA appropriated funds to PCORTF for FY2010 through FY2019, in the following
amounts: (1) $10 million for FY2010; (2) $50 million for FY2011; and (3) $150 million for each
of FY2012 through FY2019. In addition, for each of FY2013 through 2019, ACA appropriated an
amount equivalent to the net revenues from a new fee that the law imposes on health insurance
policies and self-insured plans. For policy/plan years ending during FY2013, the fee equals $1
multiplied by the number of covered lives; for policy/plan years ending during each subsequent
fiscal year through FY2019, the fee equals $2 multiplied by the number of covered lives. Finally,
transfers to PCORTF from the Medicare Part A and Part B trust funds are calculated by
multiplying the average number of individuals entitled to benefits under Medicare Part A, or
enrolled in Medicare Part B, by $1 (for FY2013) and by $2 (for each of fiscal years 2014 through
2019).
For each of FY2011 through FY2019, ACA requires 80% of the PCORTF funds to be made
available to PCORI, and 20% of the PCORTF funds to be transferred to the HHS Secretary for
carrying out PHSA Section 937.113 Of the total amount transferred to HHS, 80% is to be
distributed to AHRQ. Table D-1 presents the amounts distributed from PCORTF to PCORI and
transferred to HHS in FY2010 through FY2013 and the estimated amounts for FY2014.
Table D-1. PCORTF Distribution, FY2010-FY2014
(Dollars in Millions)
FY2013
FY2014
Funding Recipient
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
(estimated) (estimated)
PCORI 10
40
120
304
498
Transfer to HHS
—
10
30
76
125
AHRQ (non-add)
— 8 24 61
100
HHS Secretary (non-add)
— 2 6 15 25
Total
50
150
380
623
Sources: Office of Management and Budget, Fiscal Year 2013, Appendix, Budget of the U.S. Government; and Fiscal
Year 2014, Appendix, Budget of the U.S. Government.
112 ACA Section 6301(e), adding new Internal Revenue Code Section 9511. PCORI (established in ACA Section
6301(a), adding new SSA Section 1181) is a non-governmental body authorized by Congress to evaluate existing
research and to conduct original research examining the relative health outcomes, clinical effectiveness, and
appropriateness of different medical treatments.
113 ACA Section 6301(b) adds a new PHSA Section 937 requiring the broad dissemination of CER results published by
PCORI.
Congressional Research Service
49
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Appendix E. FDA User Fee Authorizations
Table E-1. FDA User Fee Authorizations and FY2013 Amounts
(in order of FY2013 anticipated revenue in Sequestration Operating Plan)
Amount in
FY2013
User fee
Initial authorizing legislation and year
($ in millions)
Prescription drug
Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA), 1992
683
(P.L. 102-300)
Tobacco product
Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, 2009
480
(P.L. 111-31)
Generic drug
Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA), 2012
284
(P.L. 112-144)
Medical device
Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act (MDUFMA), 2002
93
(P.L. 107-250)
Animal drug
Animal Drug User Fee Act (ADUFA), 2003
23
(P.L. 108-130)
Biosimilars
Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA), 2012
19
(P.L. 112-144)
Mammography Mammography
Quality Standards Act (MQSA), 1992
18
(P.L. 102-539)
Food reinspection
Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), 2011
15
(P.L. 111-353)
Food recal
Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), 2011
12
(P.L. 111-353)
Color certification
Color Additive Amendments of 1960
7
(P.L. 86-618)
Animal generic drug
Animal Generic Drug User Fee Act (AGDUFA), 2008
6
(P.L. 110-316)
Export certification
FDA Export Reform and Enhancement Act of 1996 [for medical products]
5
(P.L. 104-134);
Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), 2011 [for foods]
(P.L. 111-353)
Priority review
Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act (FDAAA), 2007
0
with vouchera
(P.L. 110-85)
Voluntary qualified
Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), 2011
0
importer (VQIP)b
(P.L. 111-353)
Total
645
Source: Prepared by Congressional Research Service.
a. The appropriations act for FY2009 was the first to authorize priority review user fees to be assessed when
a sponsor submitted an application using a priority review voucher that FDA had issued after it approved an
New Drug Application (from the same or another sponsor) for a tropical disease. Congress added a second
opportunity for a priority review voucher in return for an approved NDA for a rare pediatric disease. FDA
collected a priority review fee only once, in 2012.
b. No appropriations have yet been authorized for VQIP.
Congressional Research Service
50
Public Health Service Agencies: Overview and Funding
Author Contact Information
Amalia K. Corby-Edwards, Coordinator
Sarah A. Lister
Analyst in Public Health and Epidemiology
Specialist in Public Health and Epidemiology
acorbyedwards@crs.loc.gov, 7-0423
slister@crs.loc.gov, 7-7320
C. Stephen Redhead, Coordinator
Amanda K. Sarata
Specialist in Health Policy
Specialist in Health Policy
credhead@crs.loc.gov, 7-2261
asarata@crs.loc.gov, 7-7641
Erin Bagalman
Pamela W. Smith
Analyst in Health Policy
Analyst in Biomedical Policy
ebagalman@crs.loc.gov, 7-5345
psmith@crs.loc.gov, 7-7048
Elayne J. Heisler
Susan Thaul
Analyst in Health Services
Specialist in Drug Safety and Effectiveness
eheisler@crs.loc.gov, 7-4453
sthaul@crs.loc.gov, 7-0562
Congressional Research Service
51