Research funding in the Keck School is one indicator of the overall research activity of the school. It is also one parameter by which we are ranked by the outside world. We recently completed an analysis of research funding at the Keck School. The analysis covered the period from FY07 to FY15 and excluded grants awarded to investigators at CHLA, grants awarded a part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and industry-sponsored clinical trials. Several important patterns emerged.

First, in association with a 16 percent increase in the number of active principal investigators (from 242 on FY07 to 281 in FY15), there was a 23 percent increase in the number of awards per year (from 525 to 647) and amount of money awarded per year (from $174 to $214). In FY15, 75 percent of funds were awarded to tenured professors, who held only 42 percent of awards, reflecting larger awards held by the more senior PIs. Associate and assistant professor groups held approximately 25 percent of research funds and about half of research awards. The top five departments in overall funding were Ophthalmology, Preventive Medicine, Medicine, Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, and Psychiatry. Seventy-seven percent of research dollars in FY15 were from federal sponsors, including 61 percent as NIH primary awards and 11 percent as NIH subcontracts. Awards from the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine made up 10 percent of the overall portfolio; funding from foundations made up most of the rest.

Second, in contrast to an increase in funding overall, NIH funding was relatively flat. It started at $116 million in FY07, increased to as high as $134 million by FY10 and FY11, then fell back to $119 million by FY15. This pattern paralleled available funds in the NIH extramural pool; the Keck School consistently garnered about 0.5 percent of that pool between FY10 and FY15. Data on NIH funding for other medical schools are available through the Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research (www.bimr.org). Analysis of those data revealed a very interesting set of results. We have consistently ranked in the mid-30s in total NIH funding since FY10. Among the top 40 schools in NIH funding, we have been the lowest in number of funded PIs, but highest (yes, No. 1 on most years) in funding per PI. In other words, compared to our peers, we have a relatively small cadre of investigators who are very well-funded by NIH. This finding suggests that our most important strategy for increasing NIH funding will be to increase the number of investigators who have NIH grants. That concept is supported by a plot of the relationship between total NIH dollars against number of NIH funded PIs (below). The relationship is VERY strong. It is clear that we need more NIH-funded PIs if we are going to move up in the rankings.

Working with Interim Dean Rohit Varma, MD, MPH, and the Keck Research Council, we are developing strategies to increase the number of NIH-funded principal investigators. They include retaining funded PIs, providing bridge and pilot funding, increasing training and career development for junior investigators, strategic recruitments, and mentoring mid-level PIs to compete for larger grant opportunities like center and program grants. We look forward to working with the faculty of the Keck School on these important activities.