4 ms·

Have labs ever been started when funds were not tight?

subroutine 8y ago
Yeah all the time. Many universities will include a budget for new lab equipment as part of a professors startup package. Recent institutional offers of start-up support (excluding salary) for PhDs averaged $800k (range $500k to $1.4m). Start-up offers for MD/PhDs averaged $800k ($100k - $2.1m). This money can be used for equipment, consumables, personnel costs, and professional travel. (https://www.bwfund.org/career-tools/academic-tenure-track-offer-letters https://www.bwfund.org/career-tools/academic-tenure-track-of...)
jonhendry18 8y ago
I suppose HHMI investigators already have labs when they get picked by HHMI, but HHMI funds very nicely.
- dekhn 8y ago
  many HHMI investigators are selected in high school.
  - mattkrause 8y ago
    Really? Do you have any more information because I find that incredibly difficult to believe that HHMI is reviewing 16 year olds (on what basis?), waiting two decades for them to go through undergrad, grad school, postdoc(s), and open a lab.
    - dekhn 8y ago
      Sure, I know about 10 HHMI investigators. Of that, 8 of them were contacted by HHMI after they won their (regional or national) science fair. They all became early investigators with funding through college and grad school. Students with HHMI fellowships in grad school could generally join any lab they wanted, because their professor didn't have to pay their salary or support. Doesn't this make sense? HHMI plays a long game (centuries) and they are competing with other people for the best candidates, so it makes sense that they're capturing hearts and minds as early as possible and investing in them long term.
      - mattkrause 8y ago
        To be clear, are we talking about these HHMI investigators? https://www.hhmi.org/scientists/browse?kw=&&field_scientist_classification%5B0%5D=17367 https://www.hhmi.org/scientists/browse?kw=&&field_scientist_... I’m still having a hard time believing that someone “scouted” Richard Axel in 1960 and threw his name in a file with a note saying that he should be funded—-but only a quarter-century later. I can imagine that they congratulate winners and perhaps invite them to apply for one of HHMI’s early career programs, but I would be amazed and disappointed if people were “locking down” investigator status at 16. Success that early depends a lot on having access to the right opportunity and environment.
        dekhn 8y ago
        Oh look some of my previous advisors are on that list they're the people who told me that.
        mattkrause 8y ago
        Let me explain where I'm confused. When I was 20, I participated in a (funded) fairly prestigious summer workshop. This lead to a grant for a year of independent research from the same funders, after which I went to grad school. As a postdoc, the same sponsors funded one project of mine, then another, and a third is under review right now. However, there's no formal "pipeline" here, no midnight meeting in a spooky room where I was promised funding way down the line, long after I finally grew a beard and had it turn grey. Instead, this has continued for as long as it has because our interests have remained aligned and my collaborators and I have done pretty good work. If we have a few down years, the funding will probably dry up and someone, possibly even someone totally new to this ecosystem, will get it instead. That said, there is an obvious Matthew Effect: once you get one award, you can list it on the next application. Now you have two awards, which is more impressive, and you list them both on your third application, and so on. There are other, less tangible benefits of being visible, getting face time with program managers, and so on. My impression of the HHMI Investigator program was that it was much more like this--early awards open doors and may make it more likely that someone eventually becomes an Investigator, but there's not a formal pipeline that reaches back to high school. You seem to be suggesting that HHMI identifies high school science contest winners with the express intent of funding them later as independent investigators. This is what I'm skeptical about. I can certainly believe HHMI can identify smart people and that (some) smart people continue to be smart throughout their career.
  - vedtopkar 8y ago
    How do you mean?
  - jonhendry18 8y ago
    I know they have science lectures and things for students (annually released as a DVD) but I never heard of high school-selected investigators when I was working for them.
    - dekhn 8y ago
      all the HHMI people I know were recruited in high school after they won science fairs.
      - jonhendry18 8y ago
        Huh. Neat.
  - skosuri 8y ago
    This is not true. There is a difference between all the other HHMI fellowships, professorships, etc and the HHMI investigator position. The latter usually requires ~5 years of being a professor before you can even apply.
    - dekhn 8y ago
      If you look at the numbers, nearly all HHMI investigators started with fellowships as early funding.
      - skosuri 8y ago
        All HHMI investigators went to high school as well. The reverse is not true. Getting funding in college through an HHMI fellowship is a terrible predictor of being an HHMI investigator. They are completely independent in their selection and the programs that HHMI for education fund many orders of magnitude more people than their investigator program.
        dekhn 8y ago
        That's definitely inconsistent with the description given to me by 8 HHMI investigators. Each of them said they had a continuity of program managers from their initial contact in high school.
dekhn 8y ago
Sure. Of the two professors I worked for as a postdoc, one started a lab where funds were not tight, the other did. The main difference was the first one brought a lawyer to their hiring negotiation, and get several concessions, including a huge startup package, promises of IT upgrades, and lab space. The second one did not and I ended up running cables in the drop ceiling at night to get decent bandwidth.
skosuri 8y ago
My lab was pretty well funded right from the start. A combination of early new investigator grants and generous startup packages made us worry little about money at the start. Mid career is thought to be the major crunch.

Yeah all the time. Many universities will include a budget for new lab equipment as part of a professors startup package. Recent institutional offers of start-up support (excluding salary) for PhDs averaged $800k (range $500k to $1.4m). Start-up offers for MD/PhDs averaged $800k ($100k - $2.1m). This money can be used for equipment, consumables, personnel costs, and professional travel. (https://www.bwfund.org/career-tools/academic-tenure-track-offer-letters https://www.bwfund.org/career-tools/academic-tenure-track-of...)

jonhendry18 8y ago

I suppose HHMI investigators already have labs when they get picked by HHMI, but HHMI funds very nicely.

dekhn 8y ago
many HHMI investigators are selected in high school.
- mattkrause 8y ago
  Really? Do you have any more information because I find that incredibly difficult to believe that HHMI is reviewing 16 year olds (on what basis?), waiting two decades for them to go through undergrad, grad school, postdoc(s), and open a lab.
  - dekhn 8y ago
    Sure, I know about 10 HHMI investigators. Of that, 8 of them were contacted by HHMI after they won their (regional or national) science fair. They all became early investigators with funding through college and grad school. Students with HHMI fellowships in grad school could generally join any lab they wanted, because their professor didn't have to pay their salary or support. Doesn't this make sense? HHMI plays a long game (centuries) and they are competing with other people for the best candidates, so it makes sense that they're capturing hearts and minds as early as possible and investing in them long term.
    - mattkrause 8y ago
      To be clear, are we talking about these HHMI investigators? https://www.hhmi.org/scientists/browse?kw=&&field_scientist_classification%5B0%5D=17367 https://www.hhmi.org/scientists/browse?kw=&&field_scientist_... I’m still having a hard time believing that someone “scouted” Richard Axel in 1960 and threw his name in a file with a note saying that he should be funded—-but only a quarter-century later. I can imagine that they congratulate winners and perhaps invite them to apply for one of HHMI’s early career programs, but I would be amazed and disappointed if people were “locking down” investigator status at 16. Success that early depends a lot on having access to the right opportunity and environment.
      - dekhn 8y ago
        Oh look some of my previous advisors are on that list they're the people who told me that.
        mattkrause 8y ago
        Let me explain where I'm confused. When I was 20, I participated in a (funded) fairly prestigious summer workshop. This lead to a grant for a year of independent research from the same funders, after which I went to grad school. As a postdoc, the same sponsors funded one project of mine, then another, and a third is under review right now. However, there's no formal "pipeline" here, no midnight meeting in a spooky room where I was promised funding way down the line, long after I finally grew a beard and had it turn grey. Instead, this has continued for as long as it has because our interests have remained aligned and my collaborators and I have done pretty good work. If we have a few down years, the funding will probably dry up and someone, possibly even someone totally new to this ecosystem, will get it instead. That said, there is an obvious Matthew Effect: once you get one award, you can list it on the next application. Now you have two awards, which is more impressive, and you list them both on your third application, and so on. There are other, less tangible benefits of being visible, getting face time with program managers, and so on. My impression of the HHMI Investigator program was that it was much more like this--early awards open doors and may make it more likely that someone eventually becomes an Investigator, but there's not a formal pipeline that reaches back to high school. You seem to be suggesting that HHMI identifies high school science contest winners with the express intent of funding them later as independent investigators. This is what I'm skeptical about. I can certainly believe HHMI can identify smart people and that (some) smart people continue to be smart throughout their career.
- vedtopkar 8y ago
  How do you mean?
- jonhendry18 8y ago
  I know they have science lectures and things for students (annually released as a DVD) but I never heard of high school-selected investigators when I was working for them.
  - dekhn 8y ago
    all the HHMI people I know were recruited in high school after they won science fairs.
    - jonhendry18 8y ago
      Huh. Neat.
- skosuri 8y ago
  This is not true. There is a difference between all the other HHMI fellowships, professorships, etc and the HHMI investigator position. The latter usually requires ~5 years of being a professor before you can even apply.
  - dekhn 8y ago
    If you look at the numbers, nearly all HHMI investigators started with fellowships as early funding.
    - skosuri 8y ago
      All HHMI investigators went to high school as well. The reverse is not true. Getting funding in college through an HHMI fellowship is a terrible predictor of being an HHMI investigator. They are completely independent in their selection and the programs that HHMI for education fund many orders of magnitude more people than their investigator program.
      - dekhn 8y ago
        That's definitely inconsistent with the description given to me by 8 HHMI investigators. Each of them said they had a continuity of program managers from their initial contact in high school.

dekhn 8y ago

Sure. Of the two professors I worked for as a postdoc, one started a lab where funds were not tight, the other did. The main difference was the first one brought a lawyer to their hiring negotiation, and get several concessions, including a huge startup package, promises of IT upgrades, and lab space. The second one did not and I ended up running cables in the drop ceiling at night to get decent bandwidth.

skosuri 8y ago

My lab was pretty well funded right from the start. A combination of early new investigator grants and generous startup packages made us worry little about money at the start. Mid career is thought to be the major crunch.