Ever since graduate school, I’ve gravitated toward the nonprofit funding sector. There’s something about seeing all the people with their friends, fellow walkers, runners, dogs, and kids spending Saturday mornings walking, running or some other –athoning that makes me appreciate my paycheck a little bit more.

I’ve had the privilege of having my salary supported by more than one nonprofit through the years. I appreciate it, and it makes me work just a little bit harder, which is why it is disheartening to hear the kinds of misconceptions about medicine, science and research that seem to circle walkathons, clothing drives and support groups. I once heard that all research could be done on computers (the last time I’ll listen intently to one of the former “Bangles”), that bee stings cure multiple sclerosis and that scientists only want to study certain tumors.

At first I didn’t give comments like the last one much thought, respecting the process we all go through as we move from “un-informed” to “informed.” However, I think that widespread misstatements can be so damaging that they sometimes prevent us from getting proper care, feeling we are supported, and prevent us from taking action that will make a difference for ourselves and others. Although I respect Farrah Fawcett’s life experience and right to make statements she sees as important, I believe some of the comments she made on-tape for millions to see bear some attention. (Read more…)

Not long ago, about 20 years, the largest amount of federal dollars on research was spent by federal funding agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and National Science Foundation (NSF) as part of their annual budgets. Each agency employed staff scientists to help determine which areas of study were ripe for new advancements or in need of more attention, which funding mechanisms were most appropriate (grants for seasoned investigators or fellowships to entice new scientists to enter a particular field), and which scientists should be invited to review the proposals that came in to fill those needs.

However, over the last two decades, there has been a major shift in how we fund science from line item budgets to “earmarking,” or congressional provisions that direct approved funds to be spent on specific projects and/or take place in designated districts. Federal agencies still have their budgets, but, because the big money is in appropriations, both big and small companies and nonprofits have hired lobbyists. They’ve also invented a new positions for employees to determine which way the wind is blowing in DC and to work with lobbyists to figure out how to get a piece of the pie. You may remember K Street, a short-lived 2003 HBO series about lobbyists and politicians in DC produced by George Clooney. It starred James Carville and Mary Matalin. Among other things, their job was to chase down and try to direct or earmark funds in the best interests of their clients.

If this sounds shady to you, you’re not alone. (Read more…)

Scientific advancement requires money, and lots of it. Without science funding, discoveries go, well, undiscovered. Diseases remain uncured, healthcare practices stagnate and health outcomes aren’t measured.

Funding for scientific research has been an important issue to me throughout my career. I now serve as the associate director for scientific research at the Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago’s Sensory Motor Performance Program, which relies on research funding, and as the principal of Brain Bleu, an organization that helps nonprofit foundations that fund research to strategize. I’ve also worked with research funding from the federal funding perspective during my time with the US Department of Veterans Affairs.

Now, as a blogger for SiS, I’d like to share a little about what I’ve learned with you. I believe a better understanding of how research is financed will help us to be good stewards of research funding, whether we’re applying to move research forward as scientists burning the midnight oil in cluttered laboratories, whether we choose to lobby our representatives on Capitol Hill for more funding, or whether we participate in grass-roots movements such as walk-a-thons supporting nonprofit foundations in their efforts.

So, how is research funded? (Read more…)