McDonnell: Out Shopping For Neuroscience Bargains

During the past several years, the James S. McDormell Foundation’s support of scientific research has grown significantly—and so has its determination to spend its grant money where it will create the greatest possible impact on scientific research. The foundation’s recent thrust into the realm of cognitive neuroscience dramatically shows the new attitude that, if it’s going to be a bigger spender, it must also be, so to speak, a better shopper. Launched in 1950 on the strength of a $500,000 gift from aerospace industry magnate James McDonnell, the St. Louis-based organization maintained for the first three decades of its existence the low-proffle image of a moderately endowed hometown angel, specializing in good-neighbor donations to schools, hospitals, and charities in its headquarters city. In its early years, the foundation’s total giving made only small ripples in the nation’s overall philanthropic pool. In 1969, for example, the 26 grants it awarded totaled only $500,000. But during the 1970s and 1980s, the organization’s assets grew, thanks to continual feeding by the wealthy McDonnell, founder of McDonnell-Douglas Corp., and his two sons. By 1987, the foundation’s assets reached $101 million, allowing it to give away about $10 million a year. How best to distribute this funding posed a considerable problem. Strong Leader As it happened, the elder McDonnell had, from the time the foundation was chartered, personally overseen all funding activities. Following his death in 1980, the task of management was left to a series of part-time administrators. In 1986, realizing that a strong and permanent leader was needed, the foundation brought in its first full-time president, John Bruer. Bruer, who arrived with a Ph.D. in the philosophy of science and a good track record as an administrator with the Macy and Rockefeller Foundations, immediately made two recommendations: Let’s concentrate on a few well-defined problems or research areas—and let’s seek out good proposals instead of just sitting back and waiting for them to arrive on their own. A prime example of this new attitude is McDonnell’s plan to give away about $10 million to researchers in cognitive neuroscience—a plan that is set to move into real funding action about a year from now (announced in The Scientist, May 30, 1988). Why - cognitive neuroscience? Well, the McDonnell family had already expressed an interest in the neuroscience field overall: Early in its history, for instance, it had funded a center for neurobiology at Washington University in St. Louis. But another of the discipline’s charms, which became very important in the new quest for smart shopping, was Bruer’s belief that a small investment from the foundation would have a big effect on the problems, specifically, of cognitive neuroscience. Today, Bruer explains that in this specialty field, like other “under-funded” fields such as education research, “you get very interesting proposals from people who do quite a lot for very little money.” Says Bruer “I think it gets harder for a private foundation to elicit imaginative proposals in fields that are generously funded by federal agencies. Also, foundations aim to carve out identifiable niches, and cognitive neuroscience seemed like unclaimed turf. “A lot of major funding sources are heavily involved in molecular neurobiology, and Sloan had supported cognitive psychology,” says Bruer, “so it seemed there was an interesting niche for us.” So, McDonnell—and Bruer—decided that, although inclined to throw a chunk of its financial resources behind the burgeoning field of’ cognitive neuroscience, it had better hold true to its intention to be a “better shopper.” It decided not to rush into cognitive neuroscience, but instead to deliberately survey what specific aspects of the discipline it should support. In 1987—a year after Bruer’s arrival—the foundation announced a two-year, $1.37 million exploratory program, a sizable investment in itself, that would fund the establishment of five study panels, each ad- dressing a different topic within the overall field, and a two-weeklong summer institute to be held in June 1988 at Harvard University. The objective: The panels would suggest funding methods and establish a research agenda for cognitive neuroscience, advising the foundation on how it might spend as much as $2 million a year on the project for three to five years. The panels would also fund demonstration projects, which would exemplify the kind of research they thought would be productive. The institute held this past summer, hosted by Stephen Kosslyn of Harvard University, gathered about 80 researchers—graduate students, postdocs, and young faculty—for an intensive introduction to the value of interdisciplinary cognitive neuroscience research in the areas of vision and memory. Although final recommendations from the panels aren’t due until September 1989, panel chairmen delivered preliminary reports at the Harvard summer institute this summer (see accompanying story). Until these panels’ final reports are fully analyzed—which is expected to happen by December 1989—the foundation will not be disclosing details of its intended cognitive neuroscience program’s application and review procedures. Still, some guesses can be made about the rough outlines of the funding program. For example, the demonstration projects funded by the study panel on the subject of “attention” suggest that the foundation looks favorably on research requiring collaborations across disciplines. Highly Selective According to one McDonnell panel member, it is likely that the foundation will be highly selective in inviting grant applications for the cognitive neuroscience program. Another safe bet is that funding for summer institutes will continue, since they apparently appeal to McDonnell’s bargain-hunting instincts. (Next year’s institute has already been approved and will take place at Dartmouth College.) Although major McDonnell Foundation funding for support of cognitive neuroscience research is apt to be awarded only a year or so from now, it is certain to take years for Bruer and his colleagues to determine whether involvement in this narrow discipline was a shrewd investment of what Bruer calls the foundation’s “intellectual venture capital.” Skeptics contend that the main discoveries about the brain will continue to be made within traditional fields such as experimental cognitive psychology and neuro-physiology, rather than at the intersection of these disciplines—the focus of cognitive neuroscience. But other observers—including Bruer—sound more optimistic. “Neuroscience has matured to a point where it has a lot to say to people interested in cognitive issues,” he says. His hopes for McDonnell’s impact on the discipline echo the Sloan Foundation’s achievement in the related field of cognitive science. Sloan spent about $25 million on the field over a decade ending in 1987. The field is now vigorous, and many feel that Sloan’s support nurtured the young field at a critical time. “It could very well have happened anyway,” says McDonnell panel head Posner, “but they were the earliest to locate the intellectual development and foster it.” How will McDonnell’s impact in cognitive neuroscience match up? “If we could do half as well,” says Bruer, “I’d be happy.” John Rubin is a freelance science writer in San Francisco.

McDonnell: Out Shopping For Neuroscience Bargains

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of