Woes hit foundation funds

As scientists are turning more to foundations for grant funding, they're running into obstacles that may prevent them from accepting the much-needed money.

William Ja
Image: James McEntee
courtesy of The Scripps Research Institute

In late 2008, the newly-created linkurl:Found Animals Foundation;http://www.foundanimals.org/ announced it would be offering $50 million in grant money to get researchers to study non-surgical sterilization methods for cats and dogs. As further enticement, the foundation started the Michelson prize, which would give an additional $25 million to whoever came up with a viable sterilization treatment first. The goal was to attract researchers from a wide range of disciplines, and it worked. The foundation has received nearly 200 letters of intent since it started accepting proposals last year. linkurl:William Ja,;http://www.scripps.edu/newsandviews/e_20100208/ja.html a molecular biologist who works on __Drosophila__, was one of the first to apply. The subject matter was completely outside his field, but he came across an ad for the grant program and thought, Why not? He designed a project involving a targeted cytotoxin approach, and last fall he was excited to learn that his proposal had been approved. The grant would bring in about $100,000 per year for two years -- enough to fund experiments and hire a postdoc to work on the project. There was just one problem: the foundation stipulates that it get first rights to license any products produced as part of the grants, and the lawyers at Scripps Florida, where Ja had recently taken a job as assistant professor, objected. If they can't come to a resolution, Ja may be unable to accept the grant money. Ja's case may seem unusual, but as more foundations step in to provide funding for university research, his situation could become more common. Competition for federal research grants is tougher than ever, leading more academic researchers to look for alternative funding sources. Funding from non-profit organizations has traditionally been no-strings-attached, but some groups have decided that sponsoring research is not enough -- they want a say in what happens after the discovery stage, too. For example, the Gates Foundation wants to ensure that any products that result from its grants are made available to the developing nations who need them. The Found Animals Foundation has similar aspirations. "Our grant funding is targeted at finding a product we can get out to animal shelters at a very low cost," said Shirley Johnston, the foundation's director of scientific research. "We don't want to fund research by a scientist who will sell their product to big pharma." The Found Animals Foundation has approved seven grants so far, and all of them have required negotiations over the group's first rights stipulation. Three of the researchers have made it to the other side and received funding while four, including Ja, are still in the negotiation process. Most universities are non-profits, too, and many academic researchers share the altruistic motives of charitable organizations like the Gates Foundation. But when it comes to intellectual property rights, relations between universities and foundations can get tricky. Since 1980, when the linkurl:Bayh-Dole Act;http://www.cptech.org/ip/health/bd/ was passed, research institutions that receive federal funding are required to seek ownership of any patentable technologies produced on school grounds. Some institutions also have licensing agreements with companies. Foundations don't offer much incentive for schools to make exceptions, since foundation grants often don't cover indirect research expenses. Federal grants typically factor in a 50 percent indirect cost rate, but many foundations offer zero, leaving the research institutions to pick up the tab. "We're happy to have the funding for our researchers, but the fact is that zero-percent indirect costs makes it more expensive for the university," said linkurl:Sally O'Neil,;http://otl.stanford.edu/about/staff/sally_oneil.html manager of Stanford University's Industrial Contracts Office. As a result, grant negotiations can drag on for months, which, understandably, is frustrating for researchers. Ja is eager to get started on his foundation grant project, but until the funding issue is resolved, he can only afford to work on it on the side. "I think this is a very new thing for everyone," he said. "It'll be interesting to see how it plays out in the next few years. For now, we just make do."Needless to say, foundations don't like the delays either. Still, said Johnston, they can't sacrifice their long-term objectives for short-term gains. "Our procedures may have delayed a scientist getting their check by four or five months, but to me the upside is we're doing things the right way," she said.Editor's note (May 12): This week, Ja learned from his department head at Scripps Florida that he would indeed be able to accept the funding from the Found Animals Foundation. "So, everything ended up okay," he said. "It just took a little longer than usual."
**__Related stories:__***linkurl:Foundation-led Drug Discovery;http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/54958/
[September 2008]*linkurl:Getting Your Gates;http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/25259/
[November 2006]*linkurl:Small Foundation Enables Grantees To Take `Side Trips' In Research;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/55768/
[5th September 1994]