Newsroom

News and Analysis

Tag

research

Graphic by Nick Rice

Deal or no deal? The answer has big ramifications for GW.

The fallout from the fiscal cliff could harm the University’s research and fundraising efforts as lawmakers stare down massive spending cuts and tax reform.

As the hours tick by before the Jan. 1 fiscal cliff deadline ­– and with a deal only starting to emerge Monday – the impact on GW could be twofold.

First, if the $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts kick in, the federal agencies that dole out research contracts to professors would lose billions of dollars. 

University researchers have voiced big concerns over the 8.2 percent hole that the automatic spending cuts would puncture in federal agencies’ budgets if Congress can’t make a deal.

The effects would be real for researchers, with fewer grants up for grabs and less money for young professors, as well as a bump in the road for the University, which has aggressively tried to build itself up as a major research institution.

GW researchers earned $122 million, or 62 percent of their total research dollars, from federal research agencies in fiscal year 2010.

The deep cuts would reach across the board and slice the budgets of researchers’ most significant benefactors like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation.

If the “meat axe” to the federal budget, as one lawmaker called it, hammers down, professors would likely see more money for research coming out of GW’s pockets. As federal research dollars have remained stagnant for years, the University has looked to fill the void lately, tripling the amount of internal research funding between 2008 and 2010.

Through a spokesperson, GW’s Vice President for Research Leo Chalupa did not return a request for comment on how his office would try to offset potential cuts. In past interviews, administrators have shed some concern on the situation, but remained confident that the cuts would not go through.

Neil Buchanan, a professor in the GW Law School who studies tax law, said one message needs to be clear: Don’t panic yet.

People who rely on unemployment benefits would endure the harshest blow from the automatic cuts, as that program will immediately run out. But lawmakers could reach a budget deal in the coming weeks to still stave off the brunt of the cuts.

“There’s nothing that’ll happen January 2 that couldn’t be reversed quickly. It’s not like we’re going to go into an abyss,” he said.

Second, lawmakers may negotiate changes to the tax code by lowering deductions for charitable giving , affecting GW’s philanthropy operations.

To add more revenue to the federal government’s coffers, Democrats have proposed lowering the tax break for charitable giving. In past negotiations, President Barack Obama has pitched lowering the deduction for the wealthiest Americans from 35 percent to 28 percent.

If lawmakers approve that change and raise marginal tax rates for the wealthy overall, charitable giving would fall by 2.4 percent, according to the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University.

“It’s important to acknowledge that people don’t give because of tax deductions,” said Patrick Rooney, executive director of the Center on Philanthropy. “But we know changes in tax policies do affect how people give and affect large-end donors who give mega gifts to colleges, universities and hospitals.”

Mike Morsberger, GW’s vice president of development and alumni relations, said his office is business-as-usual as Congress contemplates changes to the tax code.

“Donors give to GW because they know and love the institution and what we do – tax advantages are only one of many factors affecting donor’s decision,” he said in an email. “Some donors may care about it more than others, but very seldom would it be the main reason to make a gift.”

The University has expanded fundraising efforts in recent years to fulfill some of its big ambitions for construction, financial aid and academic programs, like a $275 million Science and Engineering Hall. GW had its most successful fundraising year last year.

Democrats also want to raise the estate tax, which could actually spur more estate gifts to universities because the deduction for charitable giving would remain in place. GW pulled in 56 percent more gifts left in donors’ wills last year.

This post was updated Dec. 31, 2012 to clarify that the fiscal cliff deadline is Jan. 1 but automatic spending cuts go into effect on Jan. 2 because federal offices are closed New Year’s Day.


  • Permalink
  • Comments
This post was written by Hatchet reporter Jasmine Baker. 
The Global Women’s Institute launched Tuesday with big ambitions for international partnerships and grant funding – but for now it’s starting small.

Mary Ellsberg, director of Global Women’s Institute, said the institute’s Tuesday launch would be the start of a research center with big ambitions to empower women. Photo courtesy of the Office of Media Relations

The University’s newest research center got off the ground with a 14-day series of events against gender violence, culminating in a launch event with big-name speakers like the White House advisor on violence against women. And director Mary Ellsberg said it wants to aim higher.

“We’ve got to go deep. We aren’t just going to have talks and activities on the yard,” Ellsberg, who was hired in May, said. “We really want to have partnerships with universities and groups all over the world, but right now we are starting at home.”

The institute is working as a three-person office without outside funds, usually a requirement for any research center to find success. Housed and funded by the Office of the Vice President for Research – not a specific school – Ellsberg said the institute will work across  fields like law, economics and public health. The center will also add a faculty member next year in the Elliott School of International Affairs.

The center has a partnership lined up with the White House to research where it should funnel foreign aid. It’s also looking to link up the World Health Organization and Central American universities for research, Ellsberg said.

Ellsberg, who was vice president for research and programs at the International Center for Research on Women before coming to GW, is also planning a trip to the United Nations to discuss women’s issues next spring.

She said she has found a unique springboard for women’s activism at GW, where “people are just really anxious to see how they can help and how they can get involved.”

“I’ve worked for the Swedish government, the Nicaraguan government and usually women’s issues are not something people want to talk about.  You spend a lot of time banging your head against the wall, trying to get people to listen to you and I’ve just had the opposite experience here,” she said.
The idea for the institute came after University President Steven Knapp prioritized two years ago women’s issues as a top field for GW research.

The organization is one of several to be launched over the next decade, according to a draft of the University’s strategic plan, which tentatively set aside $20 to $30 million for the GW-run think tanks.

Melissa Wong, co-president of the student organization GlobeMed, said the institute would enable students to get more involved in feminist activism.

“While the institute will hold fantastic events related to gender equality, it will also act as a powerful tool for faculty, students and administration to come together on global women’s issues,” she said.

  • Permalink
  • Comments (2)

This post was written by Hatchet reporter Katherine Willard.

A public policy professor earned a $2.6 million grant this week to help lead a research team that will test the success of Advanced Placement high school science courses.

Dylan Conger, director of GW’s public policy program, will undertake a four-year study funded by the National Science Foundation to determine the effectiveness of courses designed to prepare college-ready scientists.

College Board, which administers the AP tests, recently revised its chemistry and biology offerings to test deeper knowledge of topics. This is the first study of inquiry-based science learning.

“[College Board is] very eager to get information that gives them rigorous evidence on their courses and what needs to be done to make them better, if anything,” said Conger, who will work alongside researchers from University of Washington and the nonprofit SRI International.

The study will include more than 4,000 students in 40 high schools. It will not only track the students’ progress in the AP class, but see if the class affects the students’ college and career performances.

Tracking the success of AP sciences courses is critical to understanding U.S. students’ progress in technical learning, Conger said. Education leaders and policymakers have stressed the need for schools to bolster its science, technology, engineering and mathematics teaching to help the country compete globally.

“U.S. students and workers tend to be less competitive in these skills,” Conger saide. “This gap has triggered widespread policy investments and how to promote and increase our student’s scientific and STEM reasoning abilities.”

 

  • Permalink
  • Comments (3)

Keith Crandall, Brigham Young University's biology department chair, will head up GW's Computational Biology Institute starting July 1. Photo courtesy of the Office of Media Relations

A research center that Vice President for Research Leo Chalupa called a top priority in 2009 now has its first director.

Keith Crandall, chair of the biology department at Brigham Young University, will steer GW’s Computational Biology Institute as it gets off the ground this fall. After an 18-month director search, the University announced Crandall’s hire Monday. He will start the job July 1.

“We have an amazing opportunity in this new genomics era to be world leaders in developing and implementing computational approaches to broad questions from biodiversity crisis issues to translational medicine,” Crandall said in a release. “With the exceptional faculty and outstanding leadership at GW, the institute is sure to be a huge success. I can’t wait to get started.”

Once it moves beyond its developmental stage, the research center will weave biology with computer science to study the data found in genetic mapping and DNA sequencing. The institute, to be housed on the Virginia Science and Technology Campus, will have an interdisciplinary focus – a research strategy trumpeted by GW administrators and researchers.

Chalupa pointed to computational biology as a key research area when he took on his role as the University’s first chief research officer in 2009. In May, the Board of Trustees also set aside $3.1 million for the coming fiscal year to hire research-oriented faculty in the Columbian College of Arts and Sciences.

“I believe Dr. Crandall’s recruitment as the founding director of the Computational Biology Institute will be the driving force toward more cross-campus research in many fields, including computer science, evolutionary biology and personalized medicine,” Chalupa said in the release.

Crandall boasts several research credentials, including a distinction as a “highly cited” researcher by Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge in 2010, which only one-half of 1 percent of all publishing scholars receive. Two GW researchers got the nod that year.

His research on how oil spills affect crustaceans is a key piece of a $6-million Gulf of Mexico Research Initiative – money that he will bring with him to GW. He also earned a $350,000 grant from the National Science Foundation last month that will outline the first comprehensive “tree of life” for all 1.8 million named species.

Chalupa has said hiring researchers who bring significant grant money to the University was critical to boost its reputation as a premier research university.

That grant money will also be important for Science and Engineering Hall funding. A December report from Executive Vice President and Treasurer Lou Katz projected a $55-million net increase in indirect cost recoveries from research grants, which compensate the University for lab and equipment use, to pay for the $275-million building through 2022.

The Office of the Vice President for Research is also trying to play catch-up to launch an autism research institute – trying to raise $10 million for the project.

  • Permalink
  • Comments

University President Steven Knapp and Board of Trustees Chairman Russell Ramsey broke ground on the Science and Engineering Hall in October – a project expected to ramp up GW's research reputation. Hatchet File Photo.

Updated April 8, 7:50 p.m.

The University broke into the top 100 colleges for research and development spending in fiscal year 2010, according to data released by the National Science Foundation today.

GW’s research funding across external and internal sources, ranging from the federal government to nonprofit organizations, reached a total of $196,917,000 in 2010 – the highest point since 2002 – to bring its rank in the NSF’s list to No. 99. The 34-spot climb over the year before brings the University closer to its goal of becoming a top 80 research institution by 2015.

University President Steven Knapp has looked to build up the University’s research portfolio since he arrived from Johns Hopkins University in 2007. In the last few years, GW has expanded its research leadership, focused on hiring research faculty and put more money toward undergraduate research programs.

The amount of internal funds GW devoted to research doubled from fiscal year 2010 to 2011 to ring in at $2.1 million. Most of that money went toward medical research.

As the University plays catch-up with its market basket institutions, Vice President for Research Leo Chalupa called the spike in the NSF’s ranking “another clear indication that GW is well on its way to realizing President Knapp’s plan of becoming one of the nation’s top research universities.”

Chalupa predicted that GW’s research spending will steadily grow as the four-year construction of the $275-million Science and Engineering Hall – which will include 480,000 square feet of state-of-the-art facilities – nears completion.

Universities nationwide reported spending 6.9 percent more money on research and development in all fields between fiscal year 2009 and 2010, according to NSF data.

The NSF’s annual list of research and development expenditures represented more than 700 universities across the U.S. This year’s full report, which employed a new survey design intended to produce more consistent data, has not yet been released to the public, but a preliminary report was published in late March.

  • Permalink
  • Comments

This post was written by Hatchet reporter Kelly Quinn.

Dozens of students in the School of Engineering and Applied Science pitched innovative ideas Monday during the school’s sixth annual research and development showcase but the only pair of non-engineers earned the top undergraduate prize.

Judges sized up 53 submissions that investigated topics ranging from bomb detection to voting methods, grading undergraduate and graduate competitors based on the “intellectual depth” and “broader impact” of their research, as well as their ability to clearly communicate their ideas, judge and computer science professor Evan Drumwright said.

Seniors Nathaniel Diskint and Caitlin Keating won the $2,000 award for best undergraduate research submission with a syringe that regulates the release of chemicals during injections.

The students, who are respectively biological anthropology and psychology majors, were able to compete because their faculty mentor, Michael Plesniak, is a professor in the engineering school. Their project was the only showcase submission that came from outside the engineering school.

“This $2,000 will go a long way towards developing our final prototype, finalizing the design for that and bringing it to the market,” Diskint said.

To market their product, the students plan to start a company called Imagnus Biomedical – a pitch that has gotten them to the second round of the GW Business Plan Competition. In April, eight semi-finalists for that contest will compete for $50,000 in cash and prizes.

At the graduate level, Anastasia Wengrowski and Rafael Jaimes took home the showcase’s grand prize of $5,000 for their study of the metabolism of the heart. The two first-year Ph.D. students conducted their research on rabbit hearts, which they extracted and kept alive outside each animal’s body.

The pair did not know what they would do with their prize money, and Wengrowski joked that she “would take everyone out for drinks.”

Can Korman, the engineering school’s associate dean for research and graduate studies, said one of the goals of the showcase was to “put students and faculty together.” Each group of students had a mentor with whom it worked closely and conducted research.

Korman also noted the “potential for commercialization” as an important theme of the competition, which was highlighted by the keynote address by Sid Banerjee, the CEO and co-founder of the technology consulting firm Clarabridge.

  • Permalink
  • Comments (4)
Marc Lynch, Elliott School, Political Science

Director of the Institute for Middle East Studies Marc Lynch, right, hosted several political science professors to discuss the revolutions in Egypt during an event in the Elliott School last September. Lynch directs The Project on Middle East Political Science, one of three research programs that will benefit from the recent grant. | Hatchet File Photo

The Elliott School of International Affairs’ research on the Middle East, Eurasia and aspiring world powers received a $2-million boost Wednesday from the Carnegie Corporation of New York.

The grant will continue the corporation’s support of three major research programs in the school: the Project on Middle East Political Science, the Program on New Approaches to Research and Security in Eurasia and the Worldviews of Aspiring Powers Project.

As the largest single contribution the Carnegie Corporation has made to the Elliott School, the grant matches the total external research funding the school earned during the 2010-2011 school year, according to data from the school’s annual report.

“We are proud to support this institution, which works toward one of Andrew Carnegie’s most cherished goals: the advancement of international peace,” Vartan Gregorian, president of the Carnegie Corporation of New York, said in a release.

The Project on Middle East Political Science helps support the Middle East Channel, a blog on ForeignPolicy.com that received 45 million page views last year. The project, directed by professor Marc Lynch, also holds events at the Elliott School and conducts research.

Since its launch at Harvard University in the late 1990s, the Program on New Approaches to Research and Security in Eurasia has published more than 50 policy memos per year on Russia, the Caucasus, Central Asia and East Europe. The Elliott School became its home in 2009.

The Worldviews of Aspiring Powers Project will study energy security debates in China, Japan, India, Russia and South Korea during the second phase of its research supported by the Carnegie Corporation this year.

The Carnegie Corporation issued the grant in September, according to its website, but only announced the grant Wednesday.

The award comes on the heels of the Elliott School’s top-10 ranking among international relations programs last week in a survey performed by researchers at the College of William and Mary and published in Foreign Policy magazine.

  • Permalink
  • Comments

University President Steven Knapp and professor Martha Finnemore will be formally inducted into the American Academy of Arts and Sciences at a ceremony in Cambridge, Mass. on Saturday.

Knapp and Finnemore will be among 178 of the nation’s most influential artists, scientists, scholars, authors and institutional leaders welcomed into the esteemed honorary society and leading research center.

Knapp’s background in literary theory, philosophy and religion aligns with the academy’s goals.

“One of the key missions of the academy is to promote the role of scholarship in helping the nation and the world address critical social and intellectual problems. That effort is something to which I am strongly committed, and an example of my work in that area would be the lectures I have given on the role of the humanities,” Knapp said in April when his election to the academy was announced.

Knapp, who taught English literature at the University of California, Berkeley before serving as dean of arts and sciences and then provost at Johns Hopkins University, is a vocal supporter of the humanities.

Finnemore, a professor of political science and international affairs, will also join the academy this year. The author of several prize-winning books and a variety of articles has conducted research on global governance, international organizations, ethics and social theory.

“I’m delighted to be part of the academy and looking forward to supporting its mission,” Finnemore said last spring. “The academy’s work is an important component of independent policy research and I look forward to contributing to the academy’s research efforts.”

Since its founding in 1780, the academy has inducted leading intellectuals such as George Washington, Daniel Webster and Albert Einstein.

The academy’s more than 4,000 fellows and 600 foreign honorary members are elected through anonymous nominations, followed by a vote of the entire membership. After joining the society, members can contribute to policy studies, write for the academy’s publications or serve on governance committees, among other things.

  • Permalink
  • Comments
Stephen Joel Trachtenberg

Stephen Joel Trachtenberg speaks at the National Press Club. File Photo

Former University President Stephen Joel Trachtenberg questioned the economic sensibility of research-focused institutions Wednesday, highlighting the relationship between human capital and physical resources.

In a column published in The Atlantic, Trachtenberg pinpointed faculty and physical structures as the two highest budget items for universities.

He analyzed the effects of teaching load among research faculty, emphasizing that quantity of output increasingly trumps quality.

“Today, almost across the board at 4-year colleges and universities, the teaching load of 40 years ago has been reduced almost by half. Salaries have increased, and classroom contact has been reduced. This is a difficult fiscal model,” he wrote.

The university professor of public service divided academic faculty into two groups: “those who are the best producers of research” and “those who are the best classroom teachers.”

“While the salaries of each group might remain the same, the teaching load should vary, with the researchers teaching less and the best instructors teaching more,” he said.

To refocus universities’ resources, Trachtenberg proposed an extended academic calendar and called for a new model of faculty retirement.

While speaking at a panel for the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities on Sept. 21, Trachtenberg reflected on the evolution of educational technology in higher education.

Though he recognizes the power of technology in facilitating “open-source learning,” the self-declared social networking guru admits that innovation is key.

“It is the interaction with knowledge, not the mere passive acceptance of information that makes the difference,” he said. “To make a breakthrough in knowledge, you must walk in front of technology, not sit behind it.”

  • Permalink
  • Comments

An aerial view of the Science and Engineering Complex. Courtesy of the Office of Media Relations

This report was written by Hatchet staff writer Gabrielle Marush.

The University’s highest governing body gave the go-ahead for the Science and Engineering Complex Friday morning, effectively solidifying the cornerstone of the University’s plan to become a top-tier research facility.

In a closed executive session, the Board of Trustees unanimously voted to approve the $275 million project, which has been in the works for almost 20 years.

“I’m thrilled and ready to go pop a bottle of champagne,” Board of Trustees Chairman Russell Ramsey said.

The Science and Engineering Complex – which was conceptualized before University President Steven Knapp’s tenure began in 2007 – is expected to improve research by providing a physical space the University hopes will be used for innovative studies. Knapp has said he hopes the building will help foster a culture of research at GW.

“This facility is essential for recruiting top faculty and students to our University,” Knapp said. The president added that this complex with support research in all fields, from law to medicine.

“This has been an aspiration for GW maybe as long as 40 years,” Trustee Nelson Carbonell said. “This has been a real collaborative effort, including faculty, deans, alumni and the board.”

The Board’s approval comes on the heels of last weeks Faculty Senate meeting, when professors voted to request more information about the price of the complex. The Faculty Senate has expressed concern over the complex in the past – questioning if the price for the engineering and science focused-building is justifiable for a University known for its international affairs and political science programs.

The $275 million estimate for the project is on par with the first cost estimate presented by the Faculty Senate in 2008. That report said the center could cost between $180 million and $270 million without equipment. University spokeswoman Candace Smith said last month the new $275 million estimate includes equipment and furniture. The estimate does not include the cost of hiring new professors to staff the departments, nor does it include costs to maintain the level of financial aid given to engineering students who receive some of the highest levels of aid at GW.

The University’s estimate is far below the estimate economics professor Anthony Yezer gave The Hatchet in March. Yezer – who specializes in real estate economics and has testified in front of Congress on mortgages during the financial crisis – conducted two different cost estimations and said a “conservative” cost estimate for the SEC is about $400 million.

GW plans to fund the complex through debt, revenue from Square 54 – recently dubbed The Avenue - and  fundraising. Senior University officials have expressed hope to bring in at least $100 million in fundraising dollars to support the SEC.

The Science and Engineering Complex is set to include about 400,000 square feet of above-grade space to house teaching and research laboratories for faculty and students in GW’s Columbian College of Arts and Sciences and the School of Engineering and Applied Science.  The complex – to be located on the site of the current University Parking Garage at the corner of 22nd and H streets – will greatly increase classroom space and will move the science and engineering departments under a central roof.

The design by Ballinger Architects, a Philadelphia-based firm, calls for a 400,000 square foot, eight-story building with an additional two levels below ground and four levels of underground parking. It will have a retail venue on the ground floor, but the type of venue has not been selected yet.

The main floor would be designated for non-science major education, and teaching space for science majors would be on the other floors. Research laboratories and office space would be intermixed throughout the building.

With the approval from the board, the University will now go forward with zoning permits. Construction is slated to being in 2011 and the building will be finished in 2014. Students and faculty would begin using the space in 2015.

After the executive session, the University launched a premade website touting the project.

  • Permalink
  • Comments