The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

February 7, 2023 R47410

The Office of Science and Technology Policy
February 7, 2023
(OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress
Emily G. Blevins
Congress established the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) through the National
Analyst in Science and
Science and Technology Policy, Organization, and Priorities Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-282) to “serve
Technology Policy
as a source of scientific and technological analysis and judgment for the President with respect to

major policies, plans, and programs of the Federal Government.” The act further charged the
OSTP Director with specific advisory duties within the Executive Office of the President (EOP),
For a copy of the full report,
including providing “advice on the scientific, engineering, and technological aspects of issues
please call 7-5700 or visit
that require attention at the highest level of Government.”
www.crs.gov.
Currently, the White House science and technology (S&T) advisory structure consists of OSTP and two advisory councils:
the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) and the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
(PCAST).
The President nominates the OSTP Director, who is subject to confirmation by the Senate. In some Administrations, the
President has concurrently appointed the OSTP Director to the position of Assistant to the President for Science and
Technology (APST), often referred to as the President’s “science advisor,” a position which allows for the provision of
confidential advice to the President on matters of science and technology. Arati Prabhakar, President Biden’s nominee to
serve as Director of OSTP, was confirmed by the Senate on September 22, 2022. President Biden also appointed Prabhakar to
serve concurrently as Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and as a member of his Cabinet. President Biden
became the first U.S. President to appoint a Science Advisor to the President’s Cabinet, an advisory governmental body
consisting of the Vice President, the heads of the 15 executive branch departments, and other designated top executive branch
officials.
When designated to do so by the President, the APST convenes and chairs the NSTC, a cabinet-level body of advisors to the
President on S&T policies and issues. Established in 1993 by Executive Order 12881, the NSTC is composed of
representatives from departments and agencies with significant S&T responsibilities and is charged with coordinating S&T
policy across the federal government. OSTP staff chair or co-chair most of the committees, subcommittees, and interagency
working groups of the NSTC. OSTP staff provide operational and administrative support to the NSTC.
The Director of OSTP co-chairs PCAST. Established in 1990 by Executive Order 12700, PCAST is an independent Federal
Advisory Committee composed of external advisors who advise the President on matters involving policy affecting science,
technology, and innovation as well as on matters involving S&T information needed to inform public policy in other areas.
OSTP staff provide operational and administrative support to PCAST.
Congress appropriated $7.96 million for OSTP in FY2023 an increase of 19.7% above the FY2022 enacted level. In addition
to appropriations for the office provided in the annual Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies appropriations acts,
OSTP receives indirect support from two federal agencies: the National Science Foundation (NSF), which provides funding
for the Science and Technology Policy Institute, a federally-funded research and development center that supports OSTP, and
the Department of Energy (DOE), which provides funding for PCAST.
OSTP is statutorily charged with advising the President on S&T matters; coordinating the implementation of S&T priorities
across the federal government; and engaging with external partners in industry, academia, civil society organizations, and
other governmental bodies. Accordingly, several issues related to the activities and focus of OSTP (as well as the advisory
bodies it supports, the NSTC and PCAST) are of potential interest to Congress, including staffing practices and potential
conflict-of-interest concerns; workplace culture and past congressional oversight activity; the efficacy of federal S&T
coordination; persistent vacancies of Senate-confirmed leadership positions within OSTP; and the stature and influence of
PCAST.
Congressional Research Service

link to page 32 The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Contacts
Author Information ........................................................................................................................ 28

Congressional Research Service

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Introduction
Science and technology policy issues tend to reach the presidential level if they involve multiple
agencies; have substantial budgetary, economic, national security, or foreign policy dimensions;
are highly controversial (especially when science and technology intersect with values, ethics,
and morality); or are highly visible to the public. When these matters reach the Oval Office,
Presidents generally seek information and advice from trusted sources as to the options available
and their implications.
Throughout U.S. history, Presidents have used a variety of mechanisms, including informal
contacts as well as advisory boards and committees, to obtain science and technology (S&T)
advice within the Executive Office of the President (EOP), enhance interagency coordination, and
receive counsel from outside advisors. Lacking a statutory foundation, however, these boards and
committees tended to lack permanency, as subsequent Presidents often disbanded them. When
again faced with the need for S&T advice, Presidents would form new advisory boards or
committees, sometimes reconstituted from previously disbanded ones.
In 1976, after President Nixon abolished the existing White House science advisory structure,
Congress moved to codify a formal mechanism for presidential science advice. The National
Science and Technology Policy, Organization, and Priorities Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-282) established
the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), including the position of its Director,
within the EOP to provide scientific and technological analysis and advice to the President. This
act codified and institutionalized a presidential science advice function that previously existed at
each President’s discretion.
Currently, the White House S&T advisory structure consists of OSTP and two advisory bodies:
the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) and the President’s Council of Advisors on
Science and Technology (PCAST).
This report provides an overview of OSTP, PCAST, and the NSTC; describes each entity’s
background, structure, and roles and responsibilities; and discusses selected issues for Congress.
Office of Science and Technology Policy
Situated within the EOP, OSTP provides advice to the President on S&T policies as well as the
use of S&T in addressing national concerns or challenges. Within its statutory authorities, the
composition and policy focus of OSTP has varied according to the priorities of different
presidential administrations.
This section discusses OSTP’s background, statutorily mandated responsibilities, and current
organization and policy focus, as well as its past and present budget and staffing levels.
Overview and Background
With P.L. 94-282, Congress established the Office of Science and Technology Policy to, among
other things, “serve as a source of scientific and technological analysis and judgment for the
President with respect to major policies, plans, and programs of the Federal Government.”1
Under President Biden, OSTP describes its mission as working to “maximize the benefits of
science and technology to advance health, prosperity, security, environmental quality, and justice

1 P.L. 94-282.
Congressional Research Service

1

link to page 7 The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

for all Americans.” OSTP states that the specific duties it performs in service to this mission
include:
 providing advice to the President and the Executive Office of the President on all
matters related to science and technology;
 stewarding the creation of bold visions, unified strategies, clear plans, wise
policies, and effective, equitable programs for science and technology, working
with departments and agencies across the federal government and with Congress;
 engaging with external partners, including industry, academia, philanthropic
organizations, and civil society; state, local, tribal and territorial governments;
and other nations; and
 working to ensure inclusion and integrity in all aspects of science and
technology.2
OSTP also has several roles not articulated in these formal statements. These include serving as a
sounding board and conduit of information for agency executives seeking to understand, clarify,
and shape science and technology-related policy objectives and priorities; helping agencies
coordinate and integrate their S&T strategies and activities; and helping resolve interagency
conflicts over areas of S&T responsibility and leadership.
Organization
P.L. 94-282 (as amended and codified at 42 U.S.C. §6611) established the basic organizational
structure for OSTP.3 Current statute allows for one office head—the OSTP Director—to be
nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate; not more than four Associate Directors,
also to be nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate; and a Chief Technology
Officer (CTO), who also serves as an Associate Director and who is subject to confirmation by
the Senate.
Beyond the positions authorized in statute, individual presidential administrations may choose to
structure OSTP according to their preferences and policy priorities. As Figure 1 illustrates, the
Biden Administration’s OSTP is composed of the Director’s Office and six policy teams: Climate
and Environment; Energy; Health and Life Sciences; National Security; Science and Society; and
the U.S. Chief Technology Officer (also referred to as the Tech Team). In contrast, under
President Trump, OSTP had three divisions: Science, Technology, and National Security.
Leadership
The creation of OSTP provided a new structure for the provision of science and technology policy
advice to the President, but did not end Presidents’ authority to appoint advisors in parallel. The
OSTP director is a statutory position; the authority to appoint others to assist the President exists
solely with the President. Thus, a President may opt to appoint the OSTP director to also serve as
an assistant to the President, may concurrently appoint another individual to serve as Assistant to
the President for Science and Technology (APST), or may appoint no one to serve as APST. This
variety of options also raised new and continuing questions with respect to coordination of
advice.

2 The White House, “Office of Science and Technology Policy,” available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp.
3 42 U.S.C. §6611.
Congressional Research Service

2

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

For example, as of February 2023, Arati Prabhakar serves concurrently as OSTP Director and
Assistant to the President for Science and Technology. Similarly, during the Obama, Clinton, and
George H. W. Bush administrations, the OSTP Director also simultaneously held the title of
APST. In contrast, during the Trump and George W. Bush administrations the OSTP Director did
not serve as the APST.
The difference between an individual being the OSTP Director and the APST is more than
semantic. This section discusses the two positions, including differences in their authority (both
statutory and presidentially-vested), and roles and responsibilities, as well as associated policy
implications.
Figure 1. OSTP Organization Under President Biden

Source: OSTP organization as of February 2023. White House, “OSTP’s Teams,” at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/ostps-teams. CRS graphic.
OSTP Director
P.L. 94-282 established the position of OSTP Director, who is appointed by the President and
sometimes referred to colloquially as the President’s science advisor. The OSTP Director is
subject to Senate confirmation and receives compensation at the rate provided for level II of the
Executive Schedule.
OSTP Director’s primary function is
to provide, within the Executive Office of the President, advice on the scientific,
engineering, and technological aspects of issues that require attention at the highest level
of Government.
In addition, the statute, as amended,4 directs the OSTP Director to
advise the President of scientific and technological considerations involved in areas of
national concern including, but not limited to, the economy, national security, homeland
security, health, foreign relations, the environment, and the technological recovery and use
of resources;
evaluate the scale, quality, and effectiveness of the federal effort in science and technology
and advise on appropriate actions;
advise the President on scientific and technological considerations with regard to federal
budgets, assist the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) with an annual review and
analysis of funding proposed for research and development in budgets of all federal
agencies, and aid [OMB] and the agencies throughout the budget development process;
and

4 Section 1712(1) of P.L. 107-296 inserted “homeland security” after “national security” in the list of areas of national
concern.
Congressional Research Service

3

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

assist the President in providing general leadership and coordination of the research and
development programs of the Federal Government.
The OSTP Director advises the President on policy formulation; presidential appointments; S&T-
related budget issues, including budgets for R&D; the policy significance of scientific and
technical developments; and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
education. OSTP Directors historically have also served as communication conduits between the
EOP and the federal and nonfederal S&T community. Some OSTP Directors have emphasized
communicating the views of the S&T community to the EOP, while others have focused on
communicating the views of the EOP to the S&T community.
The OSTP Director performs special roles with respect to national security and emergency
preparedness (NS/EP) communications policies, programs, and capabilities. Under Executive
Order 13618,5 the OSTP Director advises the President on the prioritization of radio spectrum and
wired communications that support NS/EP communications functions, and provides selected
evaluation of appropriate information related to the test, exercise, evaluation, and readiness of the
capabilities of existing and planned NS/EP communications.
Assistant to the President for Science and Technology (APST or “Science
Advisor”)
Unlike the OSTP Director’s position, the role of APST does not require Senate confirmation and
may confer additional status and access to the President.
As previously stated, some Presidents have chosen to appoint the person serving in the Senate-
confirmed OSTP Director role to also serve as the APST. The statute does not require, nor may
Congress compel, that the President appoint the OSTP Director to serve as an assistant to the
President (or, more specifically, as APST).
The relationship between Congress and the individual tasked with leading the White House
science advisory structure may depend, in part, on whether the individual serves as OSTP
Director, APST, or both. The executive branch has previously asserted that close presidential
advisors are immune from compelled congressional testimony. That position, however, has been
rejected by various congressional committees and by the only court to directly address the
question.6
The APST manages the National Science and Technology Council, established by Executive
Order 12881, which is charged with coordinating S&T policy across the federal government,
establishing national goals for federal S&T investments, and preparing coordinated R&D
strategies. As NSTC manager, the APST can provide federal agency coordination, information,
and guidance when special events occur, such as national emergencies, disasters, or S&T-related
international negotiations.
In addition, the APST co-chairs the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
(PCAST), established in its current form under President Obama by Executive Order 13539. As
co-chair of PCAST, the APST can seek to ascertain the consensus of the S&T community on
issues of interest to the Administration.

5 Executive Order 13618, “Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions,”
July 11, 2012, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-07-11/pdf/2012-17022.pdf.
6 CRS Legal Sidebar LSB10301, Legislative Purpose and Adviser Immunity in Congressional Investigations, by Todd
Garvey.
Congressional Research Service

4

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Associate Directors
In addition to establishing the position of OSTP Director, P.L. 94-282 authorizes the President to
appoint not more than four OSTP Associate Directors, subject to Senate confirmation, who are
compensated at a rate not to exceed that provided for level III of the Executive Schedule.
The number of Senate-confirmed Associate Director positions has varied under different
presidential administrations according to preference and control of the Senate. For example,
President Trump filled one Associate Director during his term, President Obama filled four
Associate Director positions, President George W. Bush filled two, and President Clinton filled
four.7
As of February 2023, all OSTP Associate Director positions are vacant. Rather, each of the six
core policy teams is headed by a Deputy Director, Principal Assistant Director, or Principal
Deputy U.S. CTO—positions that do not require presidential nomination or Senate confirmation.8
Table 1. OSTP Policy Teams Under President Biden
Policy Team
Description
The Climate and Environment Team
“The Climate and Environment Team strives to:

1. Provide clear, useful, and usable science and knowledge to inform
Led by OSTP’s Deputy Director for
the Administration’s climate, environment, and nature policies,
Climate and Environment
actions and initiatives by engaging across the Federal community as
the clear voice of science, coordinating relevant science and policy
processes, col aborating with partners, and connecting with
stakeholders outside of government on issues related to climate
and environment;
2. Ensure the Federal Government is a source of credible, useful,
science-based information on climate, nature, and the environment;
3. Advance equity and inclusion, including through respectful and
thoughtful engagement and the development of knowledge and
science-based policies and processes that enhance equity,
environmental justice, and opportunities for all.”

The Energy Team
“The Energy Team provides science and policy expertise on energy

and net-zero emissions technologies, and leads coordination on net-
zero emissions innovation for the Biden-Harris Administration.
Led by OSTP’s Deputy Director for Energy OSTP Energy has deep technical and policy expertise, and helps
and Chief Strategist for the Energy
develop innovation priorities for mid-to-long term technologies to
Transition
ensure the success and rapid adoption needed for a clean, secure,
and equitable clean energy transition.”

7 Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), “OSTP Full of Firsts,” White House OSTP Blog, September 24,
2010, available at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2010/09/24/ostp-full-first; Jim Dawson, “OSTP
Associate Directors Confirmed,” Physics Today, September 2002, p. 33, available at https://physicstoday.scitation.org/
doi/abs/10.1063/1.4796856; “Clinton Nominates Physicists for Key OSTP Positions,” APS News, November 1997,
available at https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/199711/ostp.cfm; CRS discussions with Stanley Sokul, Chief of
Staff, George W. Bush Administration OSTP, August 14, 2008.
8 Will Thomas, “Biden Rounding Out Appointments to Top Science Positions,” FYI Bulletin, American Institute for
Physics, September 8, 2021, available at https://www.aip.org/fyi/2022/biden-rounding-out-appointments-top-science-
positions.
Congressional Research Service

5

link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 11 The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Policy Team
Description
The Health and Life Sciences Team
“The Health and Life Sciences Team is advancing a portfolio that

demonstrates the critical importance of science and technology in
improving human health, and the role of life sciences in addressing
Led by OSTP’s Deputy Director for Health
the highest priorities of the Biden-Harris Administration. Building
and Life Sciences
on lessons learned from the historic COVID-19 pandemic and
unprecedented opportunities in the life sciences, the Health and Life
Sciences Team’s priority efforts include: bio-preparedness, including
pandemic preparedness, antimicrobial resistance, and biosecurity,
health systems and health equity, accelerating biomedical innovation
to patients, and innovation across the life sciences enterprise,
including agriculture, biotechnology, and biomanufacturing. The
team’s approach includes seeking systemic science and technology
policy opportunities that crosscut health and life sciences goals.”
The National Security Team
“The National Security Team advances the President’s agenda by

strengthening our long-term global competitiveness and reducing
catastrophic risks through the assessment, development,
Led by OSTP’s Principal Assistant Director
deployment, and governance of current and emerging technologies.
for National Securitya
To strengthen global competitiveness, the team works to develop

long-term science and technology (S&T) strategies, improve S&T
The National Security Team also includes
intelligence, shape new investments in foundational technologies,
the National Quantum Coordination Office modernize national security systems, ensure supply chain security,
(NQCO), which supports and coordinates
cultivate an agile innovation base, enhance export and investment
activities related to the National Quantum
controls, and build the world’s best STEM workforce. They also
Initiative.b
work to reduce catastrophic risks at the intersection of technology

and global security, spanning nuclear, biological, cyber, and
autonomous technologies, associated risks of war, pandemics, and

large-scale disasters, as well as emergent risks in space, ocean, and
polar domains.”
The Science and Society Team
“The Science and Society Team advances the President’s

commitment to ensuring all of America can participate in,
contribute to, and benefit from science and technology. An
Led by OSTP’s Deputy Director for
inaugural White House team, Science and Society’s role is to
Science and Society
develop evidence-based policy at the intersection of science,

technology, and innovation, reflecting the perspectives of the

individuals and communities who make up civil society. The Science
and Society Team directs priority efforts to protect the integrity of
science in the federal government, broaden participation in STEM
fields, strengthen the U.S. research infrastructure and its security,
and ensure that all Americans have equitable access to the benefits
of new and emerging technologies and scientific innovation.”
The U.S. Chief Technology Officer
“The U.S. Chief Technology Officer (CTO) Team works to
(CTO) Team
maximize the benefits of technology and data for all Americans. This

includes ensuring that the U.S. government can leverage tech and
data to effectively deliver services that U.S. policy is informed by
Led by OSTP’s Principal Deputy U.S. CTO
tech and data expertise, and that America continues to lead the
and Deputy U.S. CTOc
world in values-driven technological research and innovation. For

example, the CTO Team works to harness the benefits of artificial
The U.S CTO Team also includes the
intelligence (AI) for the American people while identifying and
National Artificial Intelligence Initiative
mitigating its pitfalls. It also works to ensure the U.S. government
Office (NAIIO), which advances and
has the capacity to use data and technology to equitably and
coordinates federal work and policy on AI,
efficiently deliver services to achieve key policy priorities. Crucially,
and the U.S. Chief Data Scientist.
the CTO Team coordinates across the U.S. government to
establish clear policies governing public and private sector use of
technologies, and to ensure all administration policy is tech-
informed.”
Source: The White House, “OSTP’s Teams,” available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/ostps-teams/.
Congressional Research Service

6

link to page 9 The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Notes:
a. As of February 6, 2023 the position of Deputy Director for National Security is vacant.
b. The National Quantum Coordination Office, “The National Quantum Coordination Office,” available at
https://www.quantum.gov/nqco/.
c. According to OSTP, “the team wil be led by the Chief Technology Officer (CTO) of the United States after
a U.S. CTO has been nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.” As of February 6, 2023,
President Biden has not nominated a U.S. CTO.
Roles and Responsibilities
In addition to the roles and responsibilities executed by the Director, OSTP exercises its science
advisory and policy coordination duties through the work of its six policy teams (described in
Table 1), its role in the NSTC, and support of PCAST.
The policy teams help coordinate government-wide initiatives that fall within specific policy
areas. For example, OSTP’s Climate and Environment Team supports the participation of the
Director, or the Director’s designee, in federal coordinating bodies such as the Arctic Executive
Steering Committee, which “meets regularly to shape priorities, establish strategic direction,
oversee implementation, and ensure coordination of Federal activities in the Arctic.”9
OSTP may issue general policy frameworks to facilitate the development and implementation of
agency policies in alignment with the President’s priorities. These may take the form of OSTP-
published white papers and strategy documents. For example, in October 2022, OSTP released a
“Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights: Making Automated Systems Work for the American People,”
containing “a set of five principles and associated practices to help guide the design, use, and
deployment of automated system to protect the rights of the American public in the age of
artificial intelligence.”10
Additionally, through its role in the NSTC, OSTP participates in issuing policy guidance for
federal science research agencies—for example, on research security,11 advanced manufacturing
initiatives,12 and orbital debris.13

9 The White House, OSTP Climate and Environment Team, “Arctic Executive Steering Committee (AESC),” available
at https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/ostps-teams/climate-and-environment/arctic-executive-steering-committee-aesc/.
The Climate and Environment Team’s Deputy Director has also participated in cross-government initiatives such as the
Northern Bering Sea Climate Resilience Area (NBSCRA); see The White House, “Readout of the Northern Bering Sea
Climate Resilience Area (NBSCRA) Joint Bering Federal Task Force and Bering Intergovernmental Tribal Advisory
Council Meeting, June 3, 2022,” available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/06-2022-
Readout-of-the-NBSCRA-JOINT-BFTF-BITAC-Meeting.pdf.
10 The White House, OSTP, “Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights: Making Automated Systems Work for the American
People,” October 2022, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Blueprint-for-an-AI-
Bill-of-Rights.pdf.
11 Subcommittee on Research Security, Joint Committee on the Research Environment, Guidance for Implementing
National Security Presidential Memorandum 33 (NSPM-33) on National Security Strategy for United States
Government-Supported Research and Development, National Science and Technology Council, January 2022,
available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/010422-NSPM-33-Implementation-
Guidance.pdf.
12 Subcommittee on Advanced Manufacturing, Committee on Technology, National Strategy for Advanced
Manufacturing, National Science and Technology Council, October 2022, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/
wp-content/uploads/2022/10/National-Strategy-for-Advanced-Manufacturing-10072022.pdf.
13 Orbital Debris Interagency Working Group, Subcommittee on Space Weather, Security, and Hazards, National
Orbital Debris Implementation Plan, National Science and Technology Council, available at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/07-2022-NATIONAL-ORBITAL-DEBRIS-
Congressional Research Service

7

link to page 13 The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

S&T Priority-Setting and the Federal Budget Process
A primary means by which OSTP fulfills its statutory duties to establish, coordinate, and
implement S&T priorities across the federal government is through its participation in the federal
budget process. OSTP works with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) during each budget
cycle during the development of the President’s budget proposal to Congress. This generally
involves four steps: (1) S&T priority setting, (2) agency preparation of budget proposals to OMB,
(3) agency negotiations with OMB, and (4) final budget decisions by the President and the OMB
Director.
1. Priority setting. A key activity in the first step is OSTP’s request to federal
agencies for their recommendations on R&D priorities. In addition, interagency
working groups meet to determine individual agency responsibilities for specific
activities when multiple agencies share responsibility for broad issue areas.
OSTP and OMB use this information in their development of a joint
memorandum that articulates the Administration’s R&D priorities and R&D
investment criteria.14 Agencies are encouraged to use this memorandum as an aid
in the second step, preparation of their budgets.
2. Agency budget preparation. In the second step, OSTP continually interacts with
agencies as they develop their budgets, providing advice and working with them
on their priorities. In general, OSTP provides more guidance to agencies with
large R&D budgets and to programs that cross agency boundaries. Federal
agencies submit their completed budget proposals to OMB. OSTP does not
review proposed agency budgets before they are sent to OMB.
3. Agency negotiations with OMB. In the third step, OSTP works with OMB to
review proposed agency budgets to ensure they reflect Administration plans and
priorities. The OSTP also participates in OMB budget examiner presentations to
the OMB Director and provides advice on priorities at that time. In addition,
OSTP provides direct feedback to agencies as they negotiate with OMB over
funding levels and the programs on which that funding is to be spent.
4. Final budget decisions. OSTP’s primary role in the fourth step of the budget
process is to advise on the quality of the agency budget proposals and their
alignment with the President’s established priorities. The President, the OMB
Director, and the Cabinet, however, make the ultimate choices.
Budget and Staffing
OSTP’s budget and staffing levels have varied considerably over time. Budget levels affect how
many staff salaries OSTP can support, as well as other aspects of its operations. OSTP has
traditionally been staffed by a combination of permanent staff, political appointees, individuals on
assignment from federal agencies, individuals on temporary assignment from outside the federal
government, and fellows.
Congress appropriated $7.96 million for OSTP in FY2023, an increase of 19.7% above the
FY2022 enacted level (see Table 2).15 Though the enacted appropriations legislation does not

IMPLEMENTATION-PLAN.pdf.
14 On July 31, 2018, OMB and OSTP issued a joint memorandum on science and technology priorities for FY2020
(https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/M-18-22.pdf).
15 P.L. 117-328.
Congressional Research Service

8

link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 15

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

specify staffing levels, the President’s FY2023 budget requested support for 46 full-time
equivalent personnel (FTE), an increase of 13 FTE from the estimated FY2022 level.16
Table 2. OSTP Funding, FY2020-FY2023
(in current dollars)
Fiscal Year
Requested
Enacted
FY2020
5,000,000
5,544,000
FY2021
5,544,000
5,000,000
FY2022
5,544,000
6,652,000
FY2023
7,965,000
7,965,000
Source: CRS analysis of President’s Budget Requests from FY2020-FY2023 and P.L. 116-93, P.L. 116-260, P.L.
117-103, and P.L. 117-328.
Figure 2 shows OSTP funding levels in current dollars and FY2021 constant dollars from
FY1992 to FY2023. During the selected period, OSTP funding levels in FY2021 constant dollars
reached a high point in FY1993 ($10.6 million) and low in FY2021 ($5.0 million).
In FY2012, Congress reduced funding for OSTP by $2.1 million (32.3%) (in FY2012 current
dollars); contemporaneously, the Administration transferred responsibility for funding PCAST to
the Department of Energy (DOE) (DOE funding for PCAST is not reflected in Figure 2).
Figure 2. OSTP Funding, FY1993-FY2023

Source: CRS analysis of data from OMB Public Budget Database, budget requests, and congressional
appropriations acts and committee reports from FY1993-FY2023; converted to constant FY2021 dol ars using
the GDP (Chained) Price Index listed in OMB Table 10.1 “Gross Domestic Product and Deflators Used in the
Historical Tables: 1940-2027,” available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/historical-tables.
Notes: The above chart reflects appropriated funding levels and does not include potential transfers of funds.
OSTP staffing levels peaked during the mid-1990s with 36 FTEs, dipping to a low of 19 FTEs in
2018 (see Figure 3). The number of FTEs requested in the President’s budget and enacted by

16 Data reported are in full-time equivalents (FTE, the amount of effort from one full-time employee over one year) and
may not equal number of staff. Data do not include staff or FTEs funded by agencies other than OSTP, such as
detailees, IPAs, and fellows. Historical data includes full-time equivalent of holiday and overtime hours.
Congressional Research Service

9

link to page 15 The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Congress for each fiscal year reflects only the number of authorized staff which may receive
direct support from OSTP. OSTP FTEs represent a fraction of those working at OSTP as it also
relies heavily on additional staffing provided through a variety of mechanisms:
 Detailees. A detail is an officially approved temporary assignment of a civil
service employee (informally called a “detailee”) to a different position in
another federal agency; the employee’s official title, series, grade, rate of
compensation, and permanent employer do not change.
 IPAs. The Office of Personnel Management’s Intergovernmental Personnel Act
Mobility Program provides for the temporary assignment of personnel (IPAs)
between the federal government and state and local governments, colleges and
universities, Indian tribal governments, federally funded research and
development centers, and other eligible organizations.
 Fellows. In the OSTP context, fellows are scientists and engineers who come to
Washington, DC, to gain experience in public policy and provide science and
technical advice to policymakers. Their salaries are often funded by external
organizations, such as academic societies and foundations. Most are recent
graduates of doctoral programs, but some are more experienced staff from
industry or universities. Fellows generally come for one year, but that time can be
extended.
These types of positons may provide a mechanism for OSTP to fill staffing needs without
additional appropriations designated for such purposes as detailees are funded by their home
agencies; fellows are funded by a variety of organizations; and IPAs may be funded by OSTP,
their home agencies or organizations, or a combination of the two.17
As of February 6, 2023, OSTP has not publicly disclosed the total number of political staff, career
staff, consultants, detailees, IPAs, and fellows employed by the office. CRS analysis of available
staffing information may suggest that OSTP employs a high ratio of such staffing categories when
compared to reported FTE levels. As previously noted, OSTP annually reports FTE staffing levels
and reported an estimated 33 FTEs in FY 2022 and 46 FTEs in FY 2023 (as shown by Figure 3).
In addition to these estimates, OSTP has also published a staff list dated October 20, 2022, which
lists a total of 136 employees.18 One private company’s database containing OSTP leadership and
staff positions, which is available to CRS, lists 33 employees and 25 vacant positions.19
According to OSTP, as of February 14, 2020, OSTP’s workforce under the Trump Administration
consisted of 4 political staff, 21 career staff, 2 unpaid consultants, 1 paid consultant, 34 detailees,
4 IPAs, and 5 fellows.20 During the Obama Administration, OSTP began with approximately 30
and ended with approximately 70 detailees, IPAs, and fellows. During the G.W. Bush

17 Office of Science and Technology Policy, personal communication, March 23, 2016. In an earlier email (January 24,
2012) to CRS, OSTP asserted that it may reimburse agencies for all or part of the personnel costs, but is not required to
do so under the terms of 3 U.S.C. 112, the provisions of which apply only to the White House Office, the Executive
Residence at the White House, the Office of the Vice President, the Domestic Policy Staff, and the Office of
Administration.
18 “OSTP Staff as of October 20, 2022,” available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/OSTP-
Staff-10-20-2022.pdf.
19 CRS analysis of Leadership Connect database, last accessed by CRS on February 6, 2023.
20 Email communication from OSTP to CRS, February 26, 2020.
Congressional Research Service

10

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Administration, OSTP had approximately 30-40 detailees per year. Toward the end of the Clinton
Administration, OSTP had approximately 60 detailees and fellows.21

Figure 3. OSTP Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Levels
FY1993-FY2023

Source: CRS analysis of data from OMB, Budget of the United States Government, FY1993-FY2023. (Note that
actual staffing numbers are provided two years later. For example, actual staffing for FY2018, comes from the
FY2020 budget request.) OMB did not provide this data for FY2001. CRS has estimated the number of FTEs for
FY2001 based on information provided by OSTP. FY2022 and FY2023 FTE levels are listed as “estimates” in the
FY2023 budget request.
Notes: Data reported are in ful -time equivalents (FTE, the number of regular hours worked by a ful -time
employee over one year) and may not equal number of staff. Data do not include staff or FTEs funded by
agencies other than OSTP, such as detailees, IPAs, and fellows. Historical data includes ful -time equivalent of
holiday and overtime hours.
OSTP is also supported by a federally funded research and development center (FFRDC), the
Science and Technology Policy Institute (STPI; see box below), which is staffed and funded
through the National Science Foundation appropriation. STPI funding for FY2022 was $4.74
million.22 The President requested $5.68 million for STPI for FY2023.23
Science and Technology Policy Institute
The Science and Technology Policy Institute (STPI) is a federally funded research and development center
(FFRDC) that provides analytical support to the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the National Science
Foundation (NSF), and the National Science Board. Congress created STPI through the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991 (P.L. 101-510). This law established the Critical Technologies Institute
(CTI), an FFRDC under the sponsorship of OSTP and supported by appropriations provided to the Department of
Defense (DOD). The RAND Corporation initially managed CTI. In 1998, Congress enacted the National Science
Foundation Authorization Act of 1998 (P.L. 105-207), which changed CTI’s name to the Science and Technology

21 Email communication from OSTP to CRS, July 27, 2017.
22 Email communication from STPI to CRS, January 19, 2023.
23 National Science Foundation (NSF), National Science Foundation FY2023 Budget Request to Congress, p. IA-2,
March 28, 2022, https://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/fy2023/pdf/fy2023budget.pdf; also see NSF “Integrative Activities
Funding Tables,” at https://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/fy2023/tables.jsp#oia.
Congressional Research Service

11

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Policy Institute, changed primary sponsorship to the National Science Foundation, and amended the institute’s
duties.
In 2003, the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA) was selected to manage STPI. Congress provides funding for
STPI through NSF appropriations, including $4.74 mil ion in FY2022a and a requested $5.68 mil ion for FY2023.b
As of 2022, STPI has approximately 40 ful -time employees.c
The duties of STPI include:
(1) The assembly of timely and authoritative information regarding significant developments and
trends in science and technology research and development in the United States and abroad.
(2) Analysis and interpretation of the information referred to in paragraph (1) with particular
attention to the scope and content of the federal science and technology research and development
portfolio as it affects interagency and national issues.
(3) Initiation of studies and analysis of alternatives available for ensuring the long-term strength of
the United States in the development and application of science and technology, including
appropriate roles for the federal government, state governments, private industry, and institutions
of higher education in the development and application of science and technology.
(4) Provision, upon the request of the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, of
technical support and assistance
(A) to the committees and panels of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and
Technology that provide advice to the Executive Branch on science and technology policy; and
(B) to the interagency committees and panels of the federal government concerned with
science and technology.d
In carrying out these duties, the statute directs STPI to consult widely with representatives from private industry,
academia, and nonprofit institutions, and to incorporate their views in STPI’s work to the maximum extent
practicable. In addition, the statute requires STPI to submit an annual report to the President on its activities, in
accordance with requirements prescribed by the President.
In addition to its primary customer, OSTP, and its sponsor, NSF, STPI has conducted work for other federal
entities including: the National Institutes of Health; Department of Transportation; DOD; Department of Health
and Human Services; National Science Board; Department of Commerce, including the National Institute of
Standards and Technology; Department of Homeland Security; and Department of Energy.
______________________________
a. Email communication from STPI to CRS, January 19, 2023.
b. National Science Foundation (NSF), National Science Foundation FY2023 Budget Request to Congress, p. IA-2, March 28,
2022, https://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/fy2023/pdf/fy2023budget.pdf; also see, NSF “Integrative Activities Funding
Tables,” at https://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/fy2023/tables.jsp#oia.
c. Ful -time employees are defined as those with approximately 80% or more of their work time devoted to STPI work.
d. 42 U.S.C. 6686.
National Science and Technology Council
The National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) is a cabinet-level body created by
executive order to advise the President and coordinate science and technology policy. Composed
of agency and department heads as well as other advisors to the President, the main functions of
the NSTC are to:
Coordinate the S&T policy-making process; ensure that S&T policy decisions and
programs are consistent with the President’s policy priorities; integrate the President’s S&T
policy agenda across the Federal Government; ensure that S&T are considered in
Congressional Research Service

12

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

developing and implementing Federal policies and programs; and to further international
S&T cooperation.24
This section discusses the background and context for the NSTC’s creation and federal S&T
coordination duties, its organization, and responsibilities.
Overview and Background
President Clinton established the NSTC by Executive Order 12881 on November 23, 1993.25 The
council was preceded by a number of interdepartmental bodies charged with coordinating S&T
policy and research across the federal government, highlighting the long-standing importance of
S&T policy coordination.
Federal support for scientific research had grown during the 1930s and early 1940s. Motivated by
a desire to harness S&T developments to address the great economic depression of the 1930s and
to support the nation’s increasing involvement in World War II during the early 1940s, the U.S.
federal government channeled increased funds into existing and newly created federal science
agencies.26 As S&T funding and programs proliferated, the need to coordinate disparate R&D
activities and initiatives across the federal government became apparent. Preceding organizations
focused on interagency coordination included the President’s Scientific Research Board
(Truman), the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific Research and Development (ICSRD;
Truman, Eisenhower), the Federal Council for Science and Technology (FCST; Eisenhower,
Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon), and the Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and
Technology (FCCSET; Ford, Carter, Reagan, George H. W. Bush).
Organization
Executive Order 12881 specifies that the President shall preside over NSTC meetings. It also
states that, when directed by the President, the Vice President or the Assistant to the President for
Science and Technology (APST) may convene council meetings. In practice, though, the NSTC is
more commonly chaired by the APST or OSTP Director. For example, both the Biden and Trump
Administrations have identified the OSTP Director as the NSTC chair. Under President Biden,
Arati Prabhakar serves as NSTC chair. Though Prabhakar concurrently serves as OSTP Director
and APST, the NSTC website and NSTC-published reports cite her title as OSTP Director.27
Likewise, under the Trump Administration, OSTP Director Kelvin Droegemeier exercised NSTC
management authority.
In addition to the APST or OSTP Director, NSTC membership is composed of the Vice President,
Cabinet Secretaries and agency heads with significant S&T responsibilities, and other White

24 The White House, “National Science and Technology Council,” available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/nstc.
25 Executive Order 12881, “Establishment of the National Science and Technology Council,” 58 Federal Register
62491-62492, November 23, 1993.
26 Examples include the Office of Scientific Research and Development (created in 1941), the Office of Naval Research
(created in 1946), and the Atomic Energy Commission (created in 1946). For more on federal support for science
research during the 1930s and 1940s, see Hunter Dupree, Science in the Federal Government: A History of Policies and
Activities, Johns Hopkins Paperbacks edition ed. (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986).
27 The White House, “National Science and Technology Council,” available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/nstc;
National Science and Technology Council, “National In-Space Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing
Implementation Plan,” In-Space Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing Interagency Working Group, December
2022, p. iii, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/NATIONAL-ISAM-
IMPLEMENTATION-PLAN.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

13

link to page 18 link to page 28

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

House office heads as designated by the President.28 In practice, the NSTC rarely meets with the
President or Cabinet-level officials present. Rather, OSTP staff and detailees conduct NSTC
activities in conjunction with federal agency staff.
Figure 4. National Science and Technology Council Overview

Source: CRS visualization of NSTC organization chart provided by OSTP via email communication on October
28, 2022.
Under President Biden, the work of the NSTC is organized under six committees (see Figure 4),
which are co-chaired by an OSTP representative and an agency or department representative: the
Committee on Science (COS), the Committee on STEM Education (Co-STEM), the Committee
on Environment (CoE), the Committee on Technology (CoT), the Committee on Homeland and
National Security (CHNS), and the Committee on Science and Technology Enterprise (CSTE).
Each NSTC committee has subcommittees, interagency working groups, and taskforces or other
bodies focused on specialized topics (see Appendix A). The members of these committees and
subcommittees are generally sub-Cabinet officials and lower-ranking staff.

28 Executive Order 12881, “Establishment of the National Science and Technology Council,” 58 Federal Register
62491-62492, November 23, 1993; White House, “National Science and Technology Council,” available at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/nstc.
Congressional Research Service

14

link to page 18 The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Roles and Responsibilities
NSTC responsibilities are primarily derived by Executive Order (as previously discussed) and
congressional mandates in statute. For example, Congress has charged the NSTC with specific
statutory responsibilities, including the coordination of a number of federal initiatives and
programs, including ocean acidification research and mitigation efforts,29 STEM education
support,30 advanced manufacturing research and development activities,31 the dissemination and
long-term stewardship of the results of unclassified research,32 and research facilities and major
instrumentation planning and evaluation.33
Congress has also directed the NSTC to fulfill comparatively broad congressional mandates. For
example, the America COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69) directs the establishment of a President’s
Council on Innovation and Competitiveness (codified at 15 U.S.C. 3718). The act states that the
council is to include the Secretary or head of a number of federal agencies, OSTP, and OMB.
Congress provided the President with the option of establishing a new organization to serve as the
Council on Innovation and Competitiveness or to designate an existing council to carry out the
requirement. Rather than establish a new, independent council, President George W. Bush
assigned the role of the President’s Council on Innovation and Competitiveness to the NSTC
Committee on Technology (CoT).34
The NSTC largely executes its coordination responsibilities through the work of its
subcommittees and interagency working groups (see Figure 4). In some cases, the coordination
of a multi-agency R&D initiative is also supported by a national coordination office (NCO).

How the NSTC Coordinates Federal R&D Initiatives Through Its Subcommittees,
Working Groups, and National Coordination Offices
NSTC subcommittees, interagency working groups, and NCOs each play distinct roles in the coordination,
assessment, and execution of multi-agency R&D initiatives. For example, the NSTC Committee on Science and
Technology Enterprise formed the Subcommittee on Networking & Information Technology Research &
Development (NITRD) to coordinate the activities of the multi-agency NITRD Program (established by P.L. 102-
194), described as the “primary source of federally funded work on pioneering information technologies (IT) in
computing, networking, and software.”35
The NITRD Subcommittee, whose members are representatives appointed by relevant federal agencies and
departments, functions as a steering body in guiding the overall focus and planning of NITRD Program activities.

29 P.L. 111-11, “The Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009,” §12403.
30 P.L. 111-358, “America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010,” §101.
31 P.L. 111-358, “America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010,” §102.
32 P.L. 111-358, “America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010,” §103.
33 P.L. 110-69, “America COMPETES Act,” §1007.
34 Memorandum of the President of the United States, “Designation of the Committee on Technology of the National
Science and Technology Council to Carry Out Certain Requirements of the America COMPETES Act,” 73 Federal
Register 20523, April 10, 2008.
35 The NITRD Subcommittee was first established as the High Performance Computing and Communications program,
which was established by the High Performance Computing Act of 1991, P.L. 102-194; for a description of the
program and NSTC Subcommittee see Subcommittee on Networking and Information Technology Research and
Development and Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence Subcommittee, The Networking & Information
Technology R&D Program and the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative Office, National Science and Technology
Council, Supplement to the President’s FY2023 Budget, December 2022.
Congressional Research Service

15

link to page 21 The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

As of FY2022, R&D activities and initiatives within the NITRD Program were organized into 12 program areas that
ranged from computing-enabled networked physical systems to artificial intelligence R&D.36
These program areas largely align with the scope of individual interagency working groups that are organized
under the NITRD Subcommittee. Such working groups are staffed with technical experts from participating
agencies who contribute relevant subject matter knowledge that informs the development of interagency R&D
priorities in a specified program area.
Finally, the NITRD National Coordination Office (NCO) provides operational support for the work of the NITRD
Subcommittee and its interagency working groups by hosting meetings, preparing annual reports to Congress, and
preparing strategic plans, among other general administrative duties.37
Budget and Staffing
The NSTC receives no direct appropriations; rather, it uses funds provided by participating
agencies to cover the operating costs of coordinating multi-agency R&D programs (such as those
discussed in Table 3). In contrast, the R&D activities that are carried out by individual federal
agencies and departments under the auspices of NSTC-coordinated initiatives are funded
separately, through agency R&D budgets. This section covers NSTC’s operational funding. It
does not cover funding levels for multi-agency R&D programs (for a more detailed look at the
organization and budget of a multi-agency R&D initiative, see CRS Report RL34401, The
National Nanotechnology Initiative: Overview, Reauthorization, and Appropriations Issues, by
John F. Sargent Jr.; for information on general federal R&D funding levels, see CRS Report
R47161, Federal Research and Development (R&D) Funding: FY2023, coordinated by Laurie A.
Harris).
Funds provided by participating agencies to cover operating costs are used to support NSTC
activities that benefit multiple federal entities, such as coordination offices, studies, advisory
committees, and administrative costs. The amount provided by participating agencies varies and
has ranged from approximately $12 million in FY2010 to $18 million in FY2018 (the most recent
year for which CRS was able to obtain total agency contributions to NSTC operations).38
Congress requires a number of multi-agency R&D initiatives coordinated by the NSTC to submit
supplemental budgetary and program reports along with the President’s annual budget request to
Congress. In a 2022 report on federal R&D, GAO examined such submissions to determine
NSTC operational funding levels for selected multi-agency initiatives, including NITRD, the
National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), and U.S. Global Change Research Program
(USGCRP).39
In FY2020, NITRD, NNI, and USGCRP each received funds from participating agencies through
a “distributed cost budget” to support a National Coordination Office, or NCO, whereby agency

36 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Research and Development: Funding Has Grown Since 2012 and
Is Concentrated Within a Few Agencies, GAO-23-105396, December 2022, p. 45, available at https://www.gao.gov/
assets/gao-23-105396.pdf.
37 For a general description of NCO responsibilities, see ibid., p. 40.
38 Funding totals do not include infrastructure contributions from OSTP and funding for NSTC activities that are solely
within a single agency. OSTP, “FY2018 Interagency Funding for Activities of the National Science and Technology
Council,” provided by email from OSTP to CRS, February 14, 2020. This report is known informally as the “Pass the
Hat” report.
39 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Research and Development: Funding Has Grown Since 2012 and
Is Concentrated within a Few Agencies, GAO-23-105396, December 2022, available at https://www.gao.gov/assets/
gao-23-105396.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

16

link to page 21 The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

contributions to operational funds were determined by the relative R&D spending levels of each
agency participating in the multi-agency initiative (see Table 3).40 NCO staff may include
contract employees in addition to agency detailees.
Table 3. Selected National Coordination Office (NCO) Budgets
FY2020
Multi-agency R&D Initiative
Funding Contributions of
NCO
Participating Agencies
NITRD NCO
$4.4 mil ion
NNI NCO
$2.9 mil ion
USGCRP NCO
$8.1 mil ion
Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Research and Development: Funding Has Grown Since
2012 and Is Concentrated Within a Few Agencies, GAO-23-105396, December 2022, available at
https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-23-105396.pdf.

President’s Council of Advisors on Science and
Technology
PCAST, an independent federal advisory committee established by Executive Order, serves as the
President and White House’s main source of advice from outside the government on science,
technology, and innovation policy. PCAST’s members, with expertise in science, technology, and
innovation, are appointed by the President from sectors outside the federal government and
charged with a two-fold mission: to advise the President on
 “matters involving science, technology, and innovation policy”; and
 “matters involving scientific and technological information that is needed to
inform policy” relating to various topics (e.g., the economy, national security).41
Overview and Background
On January 23, 1990, President George H. W. Bush issued Executive Order 12700, which
established the founding charter for PCAST and outlined the basic structure and goals of the
advisory group that largely continue today.42 Various science advisory bodies tasked with serving
the President existed prior to 1990, though they differed substantially in scope and composition,

40 Some agencies with small budgets devoted to the multiagency initiative have been excluded from such assessments.
For NITRD NCO budget and staffing, see p. 45; for NNI NCO budget and staffing, see p. 49; and for USGCRP budget
and staffing, see p. 49 of U.S. Government Accountability Office, Federal Research and Development: Funding Has
Grown Since 2012 and Is Concentrated Within a Few Agencies, GAO-23-105396, December 2022, available at
https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-23-105396.pdf.
41 PCAST has generally been charged with serving these two advisory functions, though specific aspects of its
“functions,” as outlined by successive presidential administrations, have varied. See section titled “Roles and
Responsibilities” for additional information. Executive Order 14007, “President’s Council of Advisors on Science and
Technology,” 86 Federal Register 7615, January 27, 2021.
42 Executive Order 12700, “President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology,” 55 Federal Register 2219,
January 23, 1990.
Congressional Research Service

17

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

and were not consistently reconstituted or used by subsequent presidential administrations.43 By
contrast, every President since PCAST’s creation has reestablished PCAST, with slight
differences. Some of these changes are addressed in the following section.44
Most recently, President Biden reestablished PCAST with Executive Order 14007 on January 27,
2021, for a period of two years.45 On September 30, 2021, President Biden issued Executive
Order 14048, which extends PCAST until September 30, 2023.46
Organization
President Biden’s PCAST, composed of 27 members, is led by three co-chairs: Arati Prabhakar
(as Assistant to the President for Science and Technology) and two nonfederal representatives,
Frances Arnold and Maria T. Zuber.47 PCAST members serve without compensation but may
receive travel expenses, including a per diem, as authorized by law.48
PCAST membership has expanded during President Biden’s Administration. Per Executive Order
14044, issued on September 13, 2021, PCAST membership expanded to include “not more than
32 members” (up from “not more than 26 members” when it was originally reestablished on
January 27, 2021). Under President Trump, PCAST membership included a chair and not more
than 16 additional members. In keeping with the intent of its founding charter, both
administrations stipulated that PCAST members should be appointed by the President and
represent sectors outside the federal government.
President Biden has altered aspects of PCAST’s leadership structure and composition. Executive
Order 14007 stipulates that the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology (who it
refers to as the “science advisor”) shall be a member of PCAST and serve as a co-chair. It also
allows for the Science Advisor, if also serving simultaneously as the Director of OSTP, to
designate the U.S. Chief Technology Officer as a member of PCAST.49 The executive order
issued by President Trump establishing PCAST designated the OSTP Director as PCAST chair
and did not reference the APST or designate co-chair positions.50

43 For more information on preceding presidential science advisory groups to the president, see Zuoyue Wang, In
Sputnik’s Shadow: The President’s Science Advisory Committee and Cold War America (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers
University Press, 2008).
44 Clinton Administration: Executive Order 12882, “President’s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology,”
58 Federal Register 62492-62493, November 26, 2003; George W. Bush Administration: Executive Order 13226,
“President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology,” 66 Federal Register 50523-50524, October 3, 2001;
Obama Administration Executive Order 13539, “President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology,” 75
Federal Register 21973-21975, April 27, 2010; Trump Administration Executive Order 13895, “President’s Council of
Advisors on Science and Technology,” 84 Federal Register 57309, October 22, 2019.
45 Executive Order 14007, “President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology,” 86 Federal Register 7615,
January 27, 2021.
46 Executive Order 14048, “Continuance or Reestablishment of Certain Federal Advisory Committees and
Amendments to Other Executive Orders,” 86 Federal Register 55465, September 30, 2021.
47 As of December 2022, The White House, “President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology,” available at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/pcast/members.
48 Executive Order 14007, “President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology,” 86 Federal Register 7615,
January 27, 2021.
49 Ibid.
50 Executive Order 13895, “President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology,” 84 Federal Register 57309,
October 22, 2019.
Congressional Research Service

18

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Under the provisions of Executive Order 14007, PCAST also serves as two statutorily created
advisory committees: the President’s Innovation and Technology Advisory Committee (PITAC)
created by the High Performance Computing Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-194 as amended)51 and the
National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel (NNAP) created by the 21st Century Nanotechnology
Research and Development Act (P.L. 108-153 as amended).52
Roles and Responsibilities
PCAST’s primary function is to advise the President on policies affecting science, technology,
and innovation policy as well as on matters where science and technology expertise or
information is needed to inform policies. The extent to which S&T expertise and information is
recognized as having an important role to play in formulating public policy, the second element of
PCAST’s two-fold function, has varied by presidential administration.
For example, President Biden directed PCAST members to advise on “matters involving
scientific and technological information that is needed to inform public policy relating to the
economy, worker empowerment, education, energy, the environment, public health, national and
homeland security, racial equity, and other topics.”53 President Trump directed PCAST members
to provide “scientific and technical information that is needed to inform public policy relating to
the American economy, the American worker, national and homeland security, and other
topics.”54
In addition to meeting regularly to respond to requests from the President or APST, PCAST is
also charged with soliciting information and ideas from stakeholders “including the research
community; the private sector; universities; national laboratories; State, local and Tribal
governments; foundations; and nonprofit organizations.” PCAST is also charged with providing
nonfederal sector advice to the NSTC, as requested.55
Budget and Staffing
PCAST receives no direct appropriations. Rather, the Department of Energy provides funding as
well as administrative and technical support for PCAST from existing appropriations through the
DOE Science account.56 DOE support for PCAST has generally included one to two FTEs per
year with funding ranging from $654,000 in FY2014 to $366,000 in FY2022 for salaries and

5115 U.S.C. §5511(b). In October 2005, President George W. Bush issued Executive Order 13385 designating PCAST
to serve as the President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee (PITAC) under subsections 101(b) and 103(b)
of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-194), as amended (15 U.S.C. 5511(b) and 5513(b)). In
April 2010, President Obama issued Executive Order 13539 which, among other things, changed the name of the
advisory committee to the President’s Innovation and Technology Advisory Committee (which also uses the acronym
PITAC) and continues PCAST’s role in fulfilling this statutory function.
52 15 U.S.C. §7503.
53 Ibid.
54 Executive Order 13895, “President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology,” 84 Federal Register 57309,
October 22, 2019.
55 Executive Order 14007, “President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology,” 86 Federal Register 7615,
January 27, 2021.
56 Executive Order 14007, “President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology,” 86 Federal Register 7615,
January 27, 2021.
Congressional Research Service

19

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

benefits, committee member travel, meeting planning support, and related expenses. The
President requested $750,000 and two FTEs for FY2023.57
Issues for Congress
In exercising OSTP oversight, Congress may wish to consider a number of issues, including
staffing practices and potential conflict of interest concerns; workplace culture and past
congressional oversight activity; the efficacy of federal S&T coordination; and persistent
vacancies of Senate-confirmed leadership positions.
IPAs, Fellows, and Potential Conflicts of Interest at OSTP
The ability of OSTP to perform its statutory duties depends, in part, on the size of its budget and
staff. To increase staff levels beyond what is funded through congressional appropriations, OSTP
has long relied on detailees, IPAs, and fellows. Though OSTP has not released the exact number
of detailees, IPAs, and fellows currently employed during the Biden Administration, CRS analysis
of available staffing information suggests that OSTP’s reliance on such positions is comparable to
previous administrations. For example, during the Trump and G.W. Bush Administrations,
detailees, IPAs, and fellows comprised more than half of OSTP’s total staff, and during the
Clinton and Obama Administrations, they accounted for approximately two-thirds of total staff.58
Some in the S&T community have expressed concerns that OSTP needs to have more career civil
service professional staff and a larger budget.59 In their view, additional career staff, who would
continue to serve from one presidential Administration to the next, would help maintain
institutional knowledge and provide a solid understanding of government operations. More career
staff might also enable a new Administration to move more quickly on S&T policy issues and
provide enhanced support to political appointees during presidential transitions. Reports
expressing these views assert that this change would make OSTP staff similar to other EOP expert
staff, such as those employed at OMB.60
In the absence of a larger civil service staff, OSTP relies heavily on detailees, IPAs, and fellows.
The Tech Transparency Project, a nonprofit watchdog organization, has raised concerns over the
influence that fellows and IPAs working at OSTP may have on the direction of national S&T
policy priorities.61 They assert that the nongovernmental sources of funding that support the
salaries of fellows and IPAs may pose conflict of interest concerns. For example, former Google
CEO Eric Schmidt has reportedly contributed money through the Federation of American

57 Communication between CRS and Department of Energy Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs on
January 20, 2023.
58 Email communication from OSTP to CRS, July 27, 2017.
59 Henry Kelly, Ivan Oelrich, Steven Aftergood, and Benn H. Tannenbaum, Flying Blind: The Rise, Fall and Possible
Resurrection of Science Policy Advice in the United States (Washington, DC: Federation of American Scientists, 2004),
http://www.fas.org/pubs/_docs/flying_blind.pdf; and Jennifer Sue Bond, Mark Schaefer, David Rejeski, Rodney W.
Nichols, OSTP 2.0: Critical Upgrade: Enhancing Capacity for White House Science and Technology Policymaking:
Recommendations for the Next President (Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, June
2008).
60 According to the FY2023 budget request, OMB supported 469 full time equivalent staff in 2021, an estimated 451
FTEs in 2022, and an estimated 516 FTEs in 2023. For more information, see OMB, Budget of the U.S. Government:
Fiscal Year 2023, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/budget_fy2023.pdf.
61 Tech Transparency Project, “Eric Schmidt’s Expanding Influence Apparatus,” December 20, 2022, available at
https://www.techtransparencyproject.org/articles/eric-schmidts-expanding-influence-apparatus.
Congressional Research Service

20

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Scientists (FAS) to support the salaries of “more than two dozen officials in the Biden
administration.”62 Politico reported that two individuals’ salaries were “indirectly paid” with
Schmidt funds while at OSTP, including the chief of staff for a six week period.63 The Technology
Transparency project has argued that Schmidt’s alleged financial contributions to their salaries
may pose a significant conflict of interest given that, while employed at OSTP, they may be in
positions to shape policy priorities in areas where Schmidt holds a financial interest.64
On January 10, 2023, Senator Grassley sent a letter to OSTP Director Arati Prabhakar citing
concerns over potential conflicts of interest stemming from IPA appointments at OSTP.65 The
letter was one of 10 sent to agencies across the federal government requesting information about
their use of the IPA Mobility Program.66 “Full public transparency is critical to ensuring that the
roles, responsibilities, and funding arrangements for IPA assignees at OSTP whose salaries are
funded by the FAS do not present potential or actual conflicts of interest,” the letter stated.
Pointing to guidance from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) requiring federal agencies
to document the terms and justify the value of IPA appointments, Senator Grassley requested such
records and a list of additional details pertaining to OSTP’s use of IPA appointments by January
24, 2023. As of February 6, 2023, Senator Grassley’s office has not received the requested
information from OSTP.67
Though some have raised ethical questions regarding the ability for outside groups to use IPA
appointments to influence federal policymaking, some contend that IPA positions serve a vital
function. In a January 2022 report evaluating federal agency use of the Personnel Mobility
Program (which implements IPA appointments), GAO found that the program functioned as an
important mechanism by which to address agency “skills gaps in highly technical or complex
mission areas.”68 Despite affirming that the program “holds promise as a tool” for agencies to
address skills gaps, GAO concluded that additional data on program use as well as increased
program oversight may be warranted.69

62 Alex Thompson, “Ex-Google Boss Helps Fund Dozens of Jobs in Biden’s Administration,” Politico, December 22,
2022, available at https://www.politico.com/news/2022/12/22/eric-schmidt-joe-biden-administration-00074160.
63Alex Thompson, “A Google Billionaire’s Fingerprints Are All Over Biden’s Science Office,” Politico, March 28,
2022, available at https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/28/google-billionaire-joe-biden-science-office-00020712.
64 OSTP’s former general counsel raised such concerns in internal emails obtained by Politico as cited in ibid.; a
Brookings Institution fellow claims Schmidt is attempting to influence AI policy in Alex Thompson, “Ex-Google Boss
Helps Fund Dozens of Jobs in Biden’s Administration,” Politico, December 22, 2022; and Tech Transparency Project,
“Eric Schmidt’s Expanding Influence Apparatus,” December 20, 2022, available at
https://www.techtransparencyproject.org/articles/eric-schmidts-expanding-influence-apparatus.
65 Letter from Charles E. Grassley, U.S. Senator, to Hon. Arati Prabhakar, Director, Office of Science and Technology
Policy, January 10, 2023, available at https://www.grassley.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/
grassley_to_office_of_science_and_technology_policy_-_ipa_oversight.pdf.
66 Office of Senator Chuck Grassley, “Grassley Launches Sweeping Review of Program Allowing Privately Employed
Individuals to Serve in Federal Government Roles,” press release, January 10, 2023, https://www.grassley.senate.gov/
news/news-releases/grassley-launches-sweeping-review-of-program-allowing-privately-employed-individuals-to-serve-
in-federal-government-roles.
67 Email communication from OSTP to CRS, February 6, 2023. Letter from Charles E. Grassley, U.S. Senator, to Hon.
Arati Prabhakar, Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy, January 10, 2023, available at
https://www.grassley.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/grassley_to_office_of_science_and_technology_policy_-
_ipa_oversight.pdf.
68 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), Personnel Mobility Program: Improved Guidance Could Help
Federal Agencies Address Skills Gaps and Maximize Other Benefits, GAO-22-104414, January 2022, available
https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-104414.pdf.
69 Ibid, p. 28.
Congressional Research Service

21

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

OSTP Workplace Culture and Congressional Oversight
In early 2022, allegations surfaced that Eric Lander, then OSTP Director and President Biden’s
APST, had bullied and verbally abused members of his staff. On February 7, 2022, Politico
reported that a White House internal investigation had found “credible evidence” that the
allegations were true.70 The same day, the Chairwoman and Ranking Member of the House
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology sent a joint letter to President Biden requesting a
copy of the internal White House report and OSTP’s intended next steps to “improve the
workplace environment.”71 On February 8, 2022, the White House announced Lander’s
resignation.72 Subsequently, President Biden tasked Alondra Nelson (then Deputy Director for
Science and Society) with serving as Acting OSTP Director and Francis Collins (a former
Director of the National Institutes of Health) with the temporary duties of APST and PCAST co-
chair.73
In March 2022, some Members of the U.S. House of Representatives sent subsequent oversight
letters to Nelson and President Biden’s Counsel questioning why Lander was not asked to resign
more promptly after allegations about his behavior were received.74 The letters charged OSTP
with attempting to subvert congressional oversight by refusing to disclose certain records and by
reportedly using and encouraging other OSTP staff to use the Signal Private Messenger
application, a communication technology “that is often intended to skirt federal records laws and
prevent oversight by Congress.”75 Congress may wish to conduct further oversight over OSTP’s
use of such communication methods as well as oversight pertaining to the effectiveness of
OSTP’s efforts to prevent workplace harassment.

70 Alex Thompson, “Biden’s Top Science Adviser Bullied and Demeaned Subordinates, According to White House
Investigation,” Politico, February 7, 2022, available at https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/07/eric-lander-white-
house-investigation-00006077.
71 Letter from Eddie Bernice Johnson, Chairwoman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, and Frank Lucas,
Ranking Member, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, to President Joseph R. Biden, Jr., February 7, 2022,
available at https://republicans-science.house.gov/_cache/files/0/2/024128de-d87d-4ad6-8e3e-3b377cc1d571/
5E58706F9D351315894E017D3547DE59.2022-02-07-biden-ostp-ebj-lucas.pdf.
72 White House, “Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jen Psaki, February 8, 2022,” press release, February 8, 2022,
available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2022/02/08/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-
jen-psaki-february-8-2022/.
73 After her Senate confirmation on September 22, 2022, Arati Prabhakar assumed the duties of OSTP Director, APST,
and PCAST Co-Chair. Alondra Nelson resumed her position as Deputy Director for Science and Society. See the White
House, “President Biden Announces OSTP Leadership,” press release, February 16, 2022, available at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/02/16/president-biden-announces-ostp-leadership/
.
74 Letter from James Comer, Ranking Member, Committee on Oversight and Reform; Frank Lucas, Ranking Member,
Committee on Science, Space and Technology; and Ralph Norman, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Environment,
to Dana Remus, Counsel to the President, March 10, 2022, available at https://republicans-science.house.gov/_cache/
files/b/8/b8eb805e-de97-485e-bc40-0ef7f1097d9a/F493654715E53FC7F1D3C85277E09128.2022-03-10-ostp-follow-
up.pdf.
75 Letter from James Comer, Ranking Member, Committee on Oversight and Reform; Frank Lucas, Ranking Member,
Committee on Science, Space and Technology; and Ralph Norman, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Environment,
to Alondra Nelson, Deputy Director of Science and Society Performing the Duties of Director, Office of Science and
Technology Policy, March 3, 2022, available at https://republicans-science.house.gov/_cache/files/2/a/2a9957ca-cb14-
4878-8a37-1cfb65ec0005/8B5B2F4AE270228EF29C63E60673FBD0.03-03-2022-comer-norman-fdl—ostp-lander-
allegations.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

22

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Interagency S&T Coordination
OSTP, through the work of its six policy teams as well as the NSTC, plays a key role in
coordinating federal R&D activities as well as establishing and ensuring the implementation of
national S&T priorities across federal agencies. In addition to the priority-setting that takes place
in partnership with OMB throughout the annual budget process, OSTP may also exercise its
coordination duties through oversight of the development and implementation of interagency
S&T policies and strategic initiatives.
From 2013 to 2021, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a series of reports that
evaluated various aspects of OSTP’s S&T coordination duties and issued a number of
recommendations designed to improve such efforts, as well as OSTP’s ability to track and
monitor agency progress toward national goals.76
In a July 2022 letter to then-Acting OSTP Director Alondra Nelson, GAO highlighted three open
priority recommendations which it had made to OSTP in July 2021 related to strengthening
interagency coordination. GAO urged OSTP to more effectively use the committees and
subcommittees of the NSTC to sustain coordination of national research and development
priorities and develop mechanisms to track and evaluate interagency progress toward addressing
cross-cutting S&T issues.
At the same time, OSTP’s coordination and assessment duties have continued to expand. Enacted
in August 2022, the CHIPS and Science Act (P.L. 117-167) includes provisions directing OSTP to
develop, issue, and oversee implementation of uniform S&T policies across federal research
agencies in a number of areas, such as research security and broadening participation in science.
The act also requires the Director of OSTP to develop and submit to Congress (no later than
December 31 of the calendar year after a review of the most recent national security strategy
report has been completed) a four-year comprehensive national S&T strategy, primarily focused
on economic security. The report is to be coordinated with other federal strategies (e.g., the
national defense strategy).77
OSTP’s Senate-Confirmed Leadership Positions
The degree to which Congress may exercise oversight and policy direction at OSTP may be
affected by whether a presidential administration chooses to nominate OSTP leadership positions
that require Senate confirmation.
Current statutory authority provides flexibility to the President with respect to the number of
OSTP Associate Directors (up to four, each subject to Senate confirmation) and the scope of their
areas of responsibility (entirely at the discretion of the President).78 President Biden currently has
no confirmed OSTP Associate Directors, but has established Deputy Director positions (which do
not require Senate confirmation) to lead OSTP’s six policy teams. President Trump had one
Senate-confirmed Associate Director, and three unconfirmed Principal Assistant Director
positions. President Obama established four Senate-confirmed Associate Directors and President
George W. Bush established two. Congress may wish to consider whether amending current
statute to specify certain areas of responsibility for Associate Directors or those acting in their
place might provide additional oversight opportunities.

76 GAO reports cited in a Letter from Gene L. Dodaro, Comptroller General, to Alondra Nelson, Acting Director,
Office of Science and Technology Policy, July 22, 2022, available at https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-105916.pdf.
77 §6615 and §6615b, P.L. 117-167.
78 42 U.S.C. §6612.
Congressional Research Service

23

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Appendix A. National Science and Technology
Council Organization
Committees, Subcommittees, Working Groups, Task Forces

Congressional Research Service

24

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Congressional Research Service

25

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Congressional Research Service

26

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Source: As of December 2022. Information from NSTC organization chart provided to CRS by OSTP via email
communication on October 28, 2022. Graphic, CRS.
Congressional Research Service

27

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Appendix B. NSTC Special Committees

Source: Information from NSTC organization chart provided to CRS by OSTP via email communication on
November 28, 2022. Graphic, CRS.
Note: Industries of the Future Coordination Council was created by P.L. 116-283, Division H, Title XCIV,
§9412; the sunset clause mandates its termination on January 1, 2027.

Author Information

Emily G. Blevins

Analyst in Science and Technology Policy

Acknowledgments
A previous version of this report was authored by John Sargent, Specialist in Science and Technology
Policy.
Congressional Research Service

28

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Overview and Issues for Congress

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
R47410 · VERSION 1 · NEW
29

Download PDF

Download EPUB

Revision History

Feb. 7, 2023

HTML · PDF

Metadata

Topic areas

National Defense

Science and Technology Policy

Report Type: CRS Report

Source: CRSReports.Congress.gov

Raw Metadata: JSON