Despite current controversy, former School of Medicine cardiology chief Michael Simons was a prolific recipient of research grants for the University. <\/p>\n
Following accusations of sexual misconduct in 2013, Simons faced a reduced penalty of an 18-month suspension, compared to the initial recommendation by the University-Wide Committee on Sexual Misconduct that he be removed from his position. While the motivation behind this lesser penalty issued by the University administration has not been publicly disclosed, the millions of dollars Simons brought in annually to the medical school have generated questions of partiality. According to the National Institutes of Health a major source of federal funding for medical research Simons brought in nearly $5 million in research grants annually for the past three fiscal years. <\/p>\n
[$5 million] is a lot, Stanford assistant professor Alexander Urban GRD 07 said. I would assume it is above average, but on the other hand [Simons] is a very senior person and that may have helped add funds. <\/p>\n
Urban, who received a $2.55 million grant in 2012 and a $293,021 grant in 2014 according to the NIH website, said NIH funding is essential to a major university. He added that there is a chronic sense of panic among biomedical researchers since some labs in recent years have had to slash budgets and layoff researchers. <\/p>\n
Simons, on the other hand, could be counted on from a financial perspective. The revenue he brought to the school annually never dipped below $1.5 million over the past five years. <\/p>\n
According to the Times, a part of the formal complaint filed against Simons questioned his actions regarding a grant that he was awarded, and whether Simons removed another faculty member from the grant in retaliation. The article further reported that several faculty members interviewed said researchers who attract grants might be given extra latitude. <\/p>\n
It is true that a faculty member that does receive a lot of grants is extremely valuable that goes without saying, Urban said. But that should not go so far as to encourage inappropriate action But will it never happen? Of course I cant say that, there might be temptation. <\/p>\n
Still, Urban added that he could not cite an example in which an administration may have given preferential treatment for someone who brought in a large sum of grant money. Others interviewed said there is no way to know whether financial value gives individuals preferential treatment from administrators. <\/p>\n
Faculty and administrators have stressed the continued importance of NIH revenue for medical research on campus, particularly in light of growing competition among laboratories and diminishing federal support for funding. <\/p>\n
There is a lot of uncertainty about research funding from federal budget, Provost Benjamin Polak told the News in October, prior to the allegations of Simons misconduct came to light. Although the sequester ended, the NIH peaked in real terms around 2003 and has been gradually falling in real terms. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The rest is here:<\/p>\n
Simons brought in millions for medical school<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Despite current controversy, former School of Medicine cardiology chief Michael Simons was a prolific recipient of research grants for the University. Following accusations of sexual misconduct in 2013, Simons faced a reduced penalty of an 18-month suspension, compared to the initial recommendation by the University-Wide Committee on Sexual Misconduct that he be removed from his position. Continue reading