Lab builders around California can expect to see the detailed requirements for $227 million in grants from the California stem cell agency in a couple of weeks.
On Wednesday, the Oversight Committee for the institute gave the go-ahead on the proposal, but with not without some changes. One boosted the funding range on the size of some of the grants. In the CIRM Institute category, the top of the range moved from $40 million to $50 million. In the Center of Excellence category, the top rose from $20 million to $25 million.
Ed Penhoet, vice chairman of the agency, said $40 million might not be enough. He said the board wanted to encourage collaboration on the labs but that if grant size were not large enough, each institution instead might submit separate applications. Jeff Sheehy noted that only one "true" consortium seems to currently exist. That is in the San Diego area and involves UC San Diego, Salk, Burnham and Scripps.
John Reed, another Oversight Committee members and president of Burnham, unsuccessfully sought to change the proposed scoring to give 20 instead of 15 points out of 100 in the "shared resources" category. He argued that would reflect the board's strong encouragement of collaboration. John M. Simpson, stem cell project director for the Foundation of Taxpayer and Consumers Rights, noted the change would help tilt scoring towards consortiums.
The board approved virtually all of the other elements of concept plan for the lab grants, and CIRM staff said the RFA would be out within a couple of weeks. Final approval of the grants is scheduled for next April, with an initial screening of the scientific portions of the applications at a January meeting of the Oversight Committee.
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Link to CIRM Info on Murphy
Here is the link to the CIRM press release on the appointment of Richard Murphy as interim president of the agency.
Murphy Talks About His New Role
The new interim president of the California stem cell agency says he has no intention of being a placeholder until a permanent president is found, according to the San Diego Union-Tribune.
Reporter Terri Somers interviewed Murphy following his appointment. He said,
In other coverage, Andrew Pollack of the New York Times wrote a brief story on the appointment that also mentioned the California Stem Cell Report reporting on the presidential search.
Reporter Terri Somers interviewed Murphy following his appointment. He said,
"I want to be hands-on. That is part of the attraction for me and part of what (the institute) needs right now."Murphy said,
"I think it's an exciting time for the (institute), with application requests ready to be issued for large facilities and applications for new investigators grants going out,” he said. “And now there's also discussion about a new (request for applications) for disease-oriented research groups, which I think is a great way of kick-starting disease-oriented research related to stem cells."Here is more from Somers' story about the sometimes ticklish relationship between California stem cell Chairman Robert Klein and CIRM's former president, Zach Hall:
"'I think Bob and Zach are very talented people. . . . (The institute) did very well in a very short time period,' Murphy said. 'I think Klein is a genius. The guy created Proposition 71 out of nothing and worked very diligently to put (the institute) on the map in a short period of time despite having a lot of hurdles to get over. I look forward to learning a lot from Bob.'"Somers reported that Murphy said "he has no interest in the job long term, although he had been approached several months ago to apply for the permanent position."
"Meanwhile, he said, he expects to continue the very open relationship that he had as a board member serving with Klein.
"Murphy does not think Klein's active role at the institute is causing the president search to drag on. In fact, he and others involved in academia said it is not uncommon for recruitment and hiring for such a position to take a year. Nor do they think money or the high cost of housing is an issue, with the salary range set around $500,000(note: the salary currently is capped at $412,500)."
In other coverage, Andrew Pollack of the New York Times wrote a brief story on the appointment that also mentioned the California Stem Cell Report reporting on the presidential search.
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
More On Richard Murphy and His Role at CIRM
As promised, here is more on the appointment of former Salk Institute President Richard Murphy as the interim president of the California stem cell agency.
Murphy was voted on following a 2.5-hour lunch/executive personnel session, which Oversight Committee Chairman Robert Klein originally predicted would last one hour. Only one no vote was heard during the voice vote following the executive session. That was from Jeff Sheehy. We did not have a chance to catch up with him following the meeting, but he told us earlier he was "not comfortable with the direction" the Oversight Committee was going. His comment came shortly after he was the sole negative vote on whether even to allow the subject of a possible interim hire to be considered at today's meeting.
Murphy starts work tomorrow, although he is not scheduled to relocate from the San Diego area to San Francisco until after Labor Day. His contract runs until March 4.
As we reported below, his salary will be $300,000 for roughly six months of service. That compares to the current $412,500 annual salary cap on the permanent president's salary. However, Murphy will not accept fringe benefits from CIRM. The cost of state fringe benefits range from 35 percent of salary to more. Murphy will forgo Salk-financed retirement benefits such as health insurance. That was part of a move to avoid the appearance of any conflicts of interest involving Salk.
Murphy will recuse himself from any decisions involving San Diego area institutions. John M. Simpson of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumers Rights raised another possible conflict involving Murphy's service on the board of the biomedical industry group, the California Healthcare Institute. That institute has lobbied CIRM for intellectual property rules that are favorable to industry. However, Philip Pizzo, a member of the Oversight Committee and dean of Stanford's medical school, said Murphy had resigned from the CHI board. Pizzo said he knew because he currently services on the CHI panel.
Murphy, 62, also agreed not to be a candidate during the search for a permanent president at CIRM.
Some of you may recall that Murphy earlier this year was involved in reconfiguring the dual executive structure at CIRM to make it more appealing for recruitment purposes. At one point, he called the agency's executive structure "a dog's breakfast."
As for a look at the conventional news coverage of the appointment of a new, albeit interim CEO for the world's single largest source of funding for human embryonic stem cell research, we filed a report for Wired.com. Reporter Terri Somers of the San Diego Union-Tribune was quick with a story on Murphy's appointment at 3:33 p.m. today although she was not present at the meeting.
San Diego is a global hotbed for stem cell research. Somers is currently the leading California reporter on California's stem cell business, which is No. 1 in the nation. No other writer has devoted the energy or time in the last year to the subject, but of course that could change.
We surmise that cost-cutting imperatives, currently rampant in the sagging newspaper business, prevented her from traveling. A poor decision for a paper that circulates in one of the hottest spots in the world for stem cell research, but a decision that is not much different than ill-considered moves by most of the ailing daily newspaper enterprises in this country. What newspapers sell is audience. The buyers are advertisers(75 percent or so revenues have traditionally come from advertisers). When the content is nil or irrelevant, audience shrinks, which it has been doing nationally for several decades as cost-cutting mavens ruled the day in the newspaper business. Business researchers at UC Davis have done a serious study that illuminates this trend.
But, as they say, I digress. Here are some other links to the only other two stories on Murphy we found at the time of this writing, although they are quite brief: Jim Downing, Sacramento Bee; San Francisco Business Times.
Murphy was voted on following a 2.5-hour lunch/executive personnel session, which Oversight Committee Chairman Robert Klein originally predicted would last one hour. Only one no vote was heard during the voice vote following the executive session. That was from Jeff Sheehy. We did not have a chance to catch up with him following the meeting, but he told us earlier he was "not comfortable with the direction" the Oversight Committee was going. His comment came shortly after he was the sole negative vote on whether even to allow the subject of a possible interim hire to be considered at today's meeting.
Murphy starts work tomorrow, although he is not scheduled to relocate from the San Diego area to San Francisco until after Labor Day. His contract runs until March 4.
As we reported below, his salary will be $300,000 for roughly six months of service. That compares to the current $412,500 annual salary cap on the permanent president's salary. However, Murphy will not accept fringe benefits from CIRM. The cost of state fringe benefits range from 35 percent of salary to more. Murphy will forgo Salk-financed retirement benefits such as health insurance. That was part of a move to avoid the appearance of any conflicts of interest involving Salk.
Murphy will recuse himself from any decisions involving San Diego area institutions. John M. Simpson of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumers Rights raised another possible conflict involving Murphy's service on the board of the biomedical industry group, the California Healthcare Institute. That institute has lobbied CIRM for intellectual property rules that are favorable to industry. However, Philip Pizzo, a member of the Oversight Committee and dean of Stanford's medical school, said Murphy had resigned from the CHI board. Pizzo said he knew because he currently services on the CHI panel.
Murphy, 62, also agreed not to be a candidate during the search for a permanent president at CIRM.
Some of you may recall that Murphy earlier this year was involved in reconfiguring the dual executive structure at CIRM to make it more appealing for recruitment purposes. At one point, he called the agency's executive structure "a dog's breakfast."
As for a look at the conventional news coverage of the appointment of a new, albeit interim CEO for the world's single largest source of funding for human embryonic stem cell research, we filed a report for Wired.com. Reporter Terri Somers of the San Diego Union-Tribune was quick with a story on Murphy's appointment at 3:33 p.m. today although she was not present at the meeting.
San Diego is a global hotbed for stem cell research. Somers is currently the leading California reporter on California's stem cell business, which is No. 1 in the nation. No other writer has devoted the energy or time in the last year to the subject, but of course that could change.
We surmise that cost-cutting imperatives, currently rampant in the sagging newspaper business, prevented her from traveling. A poor decision for a paper that circulates in one of the hottest spots in the world for stem cell research, but a decision that is not much different than ill-considered moves by most of the ailing daily newspaper enterprises in this country. What newspapers sell is audience. The buyers are advertisers(75 percent or so revenues have traditionally come from advertisers). When the content is nil or irrelevant, audience shrinks, which it has been doing nationally for several decades as cost-cutting mavens ruled the day in the newspaper business. Business researchers at UC Davis have done a serious study that illuminates this trend.
But, as they say, I digress. Here are some other links to the only other two stories on Murphy we found at the time of this writing, although they are quite brief: Jim Downing, Sacramento Bee; San Francisco Business Times.
Former Salk CEO Named as Interim CIRM President
Neuroscientist Richard A. Murphy, the former president of the Salk Institute, was named today as the interim president of the California stem agency.
The Oversight Committee of the agency approved the appointment on a split voice vote(one no). Murphy begins work tomorrow on a six-month, $300,000 contract. He will recuse himself from "any decisions" involving San Diego institutions.
We have more on this later.
The Oversight Committee of the agency approved the appointment on a split voice vote(one no). Murphy begins work tomorrow on a six-month, $300,000 contract. He will recuse himself from "any decisions" involving San Diego institutions.
We have more on this later.
CSUS Cash Wranglers Make Largest Pitch to CIRM
The San Diego Union-Tribune today explored an attempt to "wrangle" $31 million out of the California stem cell agency by the state college and community college systems.
Reporter Terri Somers appears to be the only mainstream reporter in the state writing about the sweeping proposal, which comes up today before CIRM's Oversight Committee in San Francisco.
Here are some excerpts from her story:
Reporter Terri Somers appears to be the only mainstream reporter in the state writing about the sweeping proposal, which comes up today before CIRM's Oversight Committee in San Francisco.
Here are some excerpts from her story:
"This is the first time an entire state system has asked for funding from the state stem cell institute, although several nonprofits have had funding suggestions.She continued:
"'This is definitely the largest request we have seen, and of course their constituency is the largest educational system in the world,' said Robert Klein, chairman of the stem cell institute's board.
"Of the $208 million in research and training grants approved by the institute, $109.9 million has been promised to scientists and laboratories in the University of California system. The UC system, which is separate from the CSU system, is more widely known for its doctorate and post-doctorate programs."
"The strategic plan includes $38 million for training of undergraduate and master's degree-level technical staff. It also includes $147 million for training programs, some of which the Cal State and community college systems can compete for.Somers wrote:
"But the the systems would like the $31 million to set up their own cohesive, statewide programs."
"Whether the stem cell institute could legally fund these proposals is something Klein said he expects its lawyers to discuss today.
"'There is a great deal of flexibility in Proposition 71 to address ideas of high merit,' Klein said of the voter initiative that created the institute."
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Interim CIRM President in The Works?
The California stem cell agency is moving towards hiring an interim president to head the $3 billion institute while it completes its search for a new chief executive.
California stem cell Chairman Robert Klein last week told the California Stem Cell Report that he hoped to advance the search in a "material way" at Wednesday's Oversight Committee. It appears that comment is linked to a cryptic, recently posted addition to the agenda for consideration of a "personal services" contract.
Stem cell scuttlebutt has it that a six-month contract would be offered to the interim president. Some possibilities could include two Oversight Committee members who left the board recently because they no longer held the positions that qualified them for seats on the committee. They are the former president of Caltech and Nobel Prize winner, David Baltimore, and the former head of the Salk Institute, Richard Murphy. Other possibilities include Ed Penhoet, vice chair of the Oversight Committee, and Paul Berg, a Stanford Nobel Prize winner who has filled in as an alternate on the panel.
Former President Zach Hall announced his retirement last December and departed at the end of April. His responsibilities were picked up on an interim basis for the past three months by two current executives at the agency, who already had full plates.
As early as last January, some members of CIRM's Oversight Committee were worried about drift at the institute during the transition to a new president, especially if there were a significant hiatus while a new president was found.
California stem cell Chairman Robert Klein last week told the California Stem Cell Report that he hoped to advance the search in a "material way" at Wednesday's Oversight Committee. It appears that comment is linked to a cryptic, recently posted addition to the agenda for consideration of a "personal services" contract.
Stem cell scuttlebutt has it that a six-month contract would be offered to the interim president. Some possibilities could include two Oversight Committee members who left the board recently because they no longer held the positions that qualified them for seats on the committee. They are the former president of Caltech and Nobel Prize winner, David Baltimore, and the former head of the Salk Institute, Richard Murphy. Other possibilities include Ed Penhoet, vice chair of the Oversight Committee, and Paul Berg, a Stanford Nobel Prize winner who has filled in as an alternate on the panel.
Former President Zach Hall announced his retirement last December and departed at the end of April. His responsibilities were picked up on an interim basis for the past three months by two current executives at the agency, who already had full plates.
As early as last January, some members of CIRM's Oversight Committee were worried about drift at the institute during the transition to a new president, especially if there were a significant hiatus while a new president was found.
FTCR: Open Up $227 Million Lab Grant Program
A watchdog of the California stem cell agency today called for making public the names of applicants for the institute's massive $227 million lab construction program.
Writing in an op-ed piece in The Sacramento Bee, John M. Simpson of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights said:
Writing in an op-ed piece in The Sacramento Bee, John M. Simpson of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights said:
"Putting scientific review on a pedestal behind closed doors does nothing to help the public's understanding of, and therefore faith in, the process. Looming over it all is the legally mandated, conflicted structure of the board. Virtually all of the university and research institutes represented on the board will seek money for buildings. It behooves members in their own best interest to demonstrate pure motives by keeping the process completely transparent.Simpson's position echoes ours. We sent a letter last week to the Oversight Committee, asking it to take action on the matter at its meeting Wednesday in San Francisco.
"The stem cell committee should direct that scientific review of building projects be handled like the facilities review -- in public. As it stands now, the two-step process is apparently premised on the notion that it's unwise to risk embarrassing an institution for its lack of scientific ability, but it's all right to say it doesn't know how to construct a decent building. That approach serves neither scientist nor architect, but especially not the public."
Monday, August 06, 2007
$5 Million Boost for Major Lab Building Proposal?
The California stem cell agency has posted a "concept plan" for a $227 million lab grant proposal that contains more details, definitions and timelines.
It also includes proposed breakdowns for the various funding categories (CIRM institutes, centers of excellence and special programs). Institutes would compete for grants each of $25 to $40 million, centers of excellence for $10 to $20 million and special programs for $5 to $10 million.
However, the concept plan, available on CIRM's website, said:
CIRM also said that the agency committed less than expected in its earlier shared lab proposal, making another $5 million available for the latest grant effort. It recommended that the Oversight Committee commit the additional funds to the major lab grant effort.
Much of the material in the plan duplicates earlier documents, but, as they say, the devil is in the details, plenty of which are contained in the concept plan.
It also includes proposed breakdowns for the various funding categories (CIRM institutes, centers of excellence and special programs). Institutes would compete for grants each of $25 to $40 million, centers of excellence for $10 to $20 million and special programs for $5 to $10 million.
However, the concept plan, available on CIRM's website, said:
"There is no analytical basis at this time to determine the appropriate amount of funds to be allocated to each category, and this information will not be available to the ICOC until the GWG (grants working group) submits its recommendations."The document went on to say that CIRM staff “has evaluated several scenarios for funding” and recommends that the Oversight Committee on Wednesday adopt the ranges above, presumably for the time being.
CIRM also said that the agency committed less than expected in its earlier shared lab proposal, making another $5 million available for the latest grant effort. It recommended that the Oversight Committee commit the additional funds to the major lab grant effort.
Much of the material in the plan duplicates earlier documents, but, as they say, the devil is in the details, plenty of which are contained in the concept plan.
Fresh Comment
Patient advocate Don Reed sent the following comment on an item below involving him. “The post about the "Wonder Women of the ICOC" was a joy to write--and as for the unsung heroines (and heroes) of the CIRM, please know I intend to sing about you folks as well! “
Kerfuffle Erupts Involving Geron, Biopolitical Times
Geron, stem cell scientist Hans Keirstead, New Yorker magazine and Wired.com – all play a part in a recent piece about failed promises on the Biopolitical Times blog.
Jesse Reynolds of the Center for Genetics and Society has posted a good wrapup of the kerfuffle, in which Kierstead takes on Reynolds and vice versa. It all began last week when Reynolds said that Geron has repeatedly promised the beginning of stem cell trials that have not materialized within the predicted time frame. Wired.com picked up the Reynolds piece. Kierstead then commented online that Wired.com had peformed a “tremendous disservice to the stem cell field.”
Reynolds replied in the latest posting:
Jesse Reynolds of the Center for Genetics and Society has posted a good wrapup of the kerfuffle, in which Kierstead takes on Reynolds and vice versa. It all began last week when Reynolds said that Geron has repeatedly promised the beginning of stem cell trials that have not materialized within the predicted time frame. Wired.com picked up the Reynolds piece. Kierstead then commented online that Wired.com had peformed a “tremendous disservice to the stem cell field.”
Reynolds replied in the latest posting:
"The truth is that (Brandon) Keim (of Wired) and I did little more than cite public statements made by Geron's chief executive. Isn't it (Tom) Okarma (president of Geron) who is disserving the stem cell field by misrepresenting the feasibility of Geron's stem cell clinical trials over and over again?"Reynolds' term for the time periods that have elapsed between predictions of clinical trials? “Okarma units.”
Sunday, August 05, 2007
California State Colleges Seek $31 Million From CIRM
California's huge state college system is proposing that the California stem cell agency finance a $31 million, five-year program to train thousands of persons to work in biotech and related fields.
Officials of 23-campus, California State University and College system are scheduled to appear before CIRM's Oversight Committee this Wednesday to tout the proposal. No hint of the size or scope of the proposal is available on the committee's agenda. After several days of questioning, state college officials finally confirmed that this document that we found on the Internet lays out details and justification for the training program.
The document says that state and community colleges are in the best position to educate the workforce required by the state's stem cell industry. The goals of the effort including a doubling of the number of CSUS students graduating with training in biotech and related fields over the next five years. It also calls for creation of new courses, graduate level programs and creation of regional training facilities.
California stem Chairman Robert Klein placed only a cryptic notation concerning the CSUS matter on Wednesday's Oversight Committee agenda. No further information was available except for the response from CSUS.
(For those of you unfamiliar with higher education in California, the CSUS is completely separate from the University of California.)
Officials of 23-campus, California State University and College system are scheduled to appear before CIRM's Oversight Committee this Wednesday to tout the proposal. No hint of the size or scope of the proposal is available on the committee's agenda. After several days of questioning, state college officials finally confirmed that this document that we found on the Internet lays out details and justification for the training program.
The document says that state and community colleges are in the best position to educate the workforce required by the state's stem cell industry. The goals of the effort including a doubling of the number of CSUS students graduating with training in biotech and related fields over the next five years. It also calls for creation of new courses, graduate level programs and creation of regional training facilities.
California stem Chairman Robert Klein placed only a cryptic notation concerning the CSUS matter on Wednesday's Oversight Committee agenda. No further information was available except for the response from CSUS.
(For those of you unfamiliar with higher education in California, the CSUS is completely separate from the University of California.)
Friday, August 03, 2007
Peril and the CIRM Presidential Search
Attempting to understand the presidential search of the California stem cell agency certainly meets the definition of a task fraught with peril. It is a process that is being conducted behind closed doors and whose participants are sworn to secrecy on any significant details. All of which is entirely appropriate.
Nonetheless the search is fundamentally important to the current and future health of the $3 billion effort and is worthy of some public scrutiny.
We wrote earlier this week about the process, and today another piece of ours appeared on Wired.com.
To summarize: compensation, personal chemistry, structural management issues all are complicating the recruitment effort. But there are others, one of which is the desire for a blue ribbon scientist to run the agency. But the new president would also be expected to give up his lab and research work. The first search in 2005 apparently brought forth some scientists/presidential candidates who wanted to continue their lab work. This time around that seems to have been ruled out by the Oversight Committee. So that narrows the field.
Former president Zach Hall earlier this year suggested to CIRM directors that a new president could do very well without having a high-toned scientific pedigree. But when we talked to Oversight Committee member Jeff Sheehy last week, he said candidates with a good scientific vision were the ones that excited him. Of course, Sheehy is but one of 29 members of the committee.
Hall also said in an interview last month that the Oversight Committee “must be willing to enable a new president to take a strong leadership role.” It was a comment based on the ticklish relationship between him and California stem cell chairman Robert Klein, which was exacerbated by Prop. 71's unnecessary dabblings in management minutia. Those are now locked in state law and virtually immutable.
Finally come comments from John Simpson of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumers Rights. He is a longtime observer of CIRM and reasonably fair-minded. We asked him for his thoughts on the search. Here is the text of what he sent us:
Nonetheless the search is fundamentally important to the current and future health of the $3 billion effort and is worthy of some public scrutiny.
We wrote earlier this week about the process, and today another piece of ours appeared on Wired.com.
To summarize: compensation, personal chemistry, structural management issues all are complicating the recruitment effort. But there are others, one of which is the desire for a blue ribbon scientist to run the agency. But the new president would also be expected to give up his lab and research work. The first search in 2005 apparently brought forth some scientists/presidential candidates who wanted to continue their lab work. This time around that seems to have been ruled out by the Oversight Committee. So that narrows the field.
Former president Zach Hall earlier this year suggested to CIRM directors that a new president could do very well without having a high-toned scientific pedigree. But when we talked to Oversight Committee member Jeff Sheehy last week, he said candidates with a good scientific vision were the ones that excited him. Of course, Sheehy is but one of 29 members of the committee.
Hall also said in an interview last month that the Oversight Committee “must be willing to enable a new president to take a strong leadership role.” It was a comment based on the ticklish relationship between him and California stem cell chairman Robert Klein, which was exacerbated by Prop. 71's unnecessary dabblings in management minutia. Those are now locked in state law and virtually immutable.
Finally come comments from John Simpson of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumers Rights. He is a longtime observer of CIRM and reasonably fair-minded. We asked him for his thoughts on the search. Here is the text of what he sent us:
"The selection of CIRM's president is undoubtedly the ICOC's single most important task. He or she will be the chief executive of an enterprise that is costing California taxpayers $6 billion.One caveat to Simpson's remarks. While Klein did speak last December about stepping down next year, it is not a done deal.
"Zach Hall helped define the president's role and deserves credit for getting the fledgling agency off the ground. The new president faces the daunting task of moving forward from entrepreneurial, adrenaline-filled days of a start-up mode to maintaining an established agency where the routine is, indeed, routine.
"He or she must be seen to do the public's business in public and will need vision to move the agency forward.
"A thick skin and diplomatic skills will be a necessary in dealing with some of the oversized egos on the ICOC as well as the various members of the public who take an interest in the agency.
"Judging from hints dropped by ICOC Chairman Bob Klein, the new president will have to deal with a new board chairman within a year; Klein will likely step down in 2008. That could make the new president's job easier.
"The average California probably won't pay much attention to the agency even though $6 billion of taxpayer money is at stake unless something goes terribly wrong, or incredibly right -- meaning a significant scientific breakthrough results from California's efforts.
"The most likely scenario is the middle ground. Incremental advances, but no flashy breakthroughs.
"If the ICOC can pick the perfect person, however, Californians will ultimately take notice because the president will actually deliver on the wild promises made during the campaign to pass Proposition 71."
Time for More Openness in $220 Million Grant Program
The California Stem Cell Report today formally called on directors of the California stem cell agency to open up the $220 million lab grant process by making the names of applicants and other related information a matter of public record.
In a letter to California stem cell Chairman Robert Klein, David Jensen, publisher of the report, said such action would conform to the letter and spirit of the California Constitution, which guarantees the public a broadly construed right of access to information about “the conduct of the people's business.” He also said opening up the information would help to preserve public confidence in embryonic stem cell research.
Here is the text of the letter:
In a letter to California stem cell Chairman Robert Klein, David Jensen, publisher of the report, said such action would conform to the letter and spirit of the California Constitution, which guarantees the public a broadly construed right of access to information about “the conduct of the people's business.” He also said opening up the information would help to preserve public confidence in embryonic stem cell research.
Here is the text of the letter:
"This letter is to request that the Oversight Committee -- as part of the RFA to be considered for major labs at the Aug,. 8 meeting -- stipulate that the names of the applying institutions, their letters of intent and applications are a public record when they are received by the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine.
"Such action by the ICOC would serve the best interests of CIRM and its goal of adherence to the highest standards of openness and transparency. It would also comply with the letter and spirit of the California Constitution, which declares that the people of California have “the right of access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business” -- a right that is to be “broadly construed.” As you know, 83 percent of voters approved that constitutional right of access in November 2004 when they passed Prop. 59.
"In many ways, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine is very open, which is a tribute to the Oversight Committee's commitment to transparency.
"But now, as the agency embarks on its single largest round of grants, it is time to take another step to protect the public interest and the agency itself as well. Fifteen members of the Oversight Committee have ties of one sort or another to institutions that may well seek funds in this round of lab grants. The entire University of California system is represented on the board, along with Stanford University, the Burnham Institute and other well-regarded institutions. On Aug. 8, the board will set the rules under which employers of many of its members stand to benefit by tens of millions of dollars. Combine all that with the critically important but closed-door, scientific review of the applications, and you have an information void that can only lead to the worst sort of speculation. Making the applicant names and other information public goes a long way in helping to prevent such a situation.
"In the past, CIRM has made a case for privacy on research grant applications from individual scientists. But applications from government and nonprofit institutions are fundamentally different. They are not subject to the same concerns that individual researchers might have regarding their reputations or work.
"We urge you to act in the public's best interest and open up the $220 million lab grant process by making public the names, letters of intent and applications from all institutions seeking funds. Such a move will enhance CIRM's reputation and help to maintain public confidence in embryonic stem cell research."
Thursday, August 02, 2007
A Wired Look at CIRM Presidential Search
Wired.com has a piece by yours truly on the effort to find a new president for the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine. We will carry more a few more details on the effort later on Friday. You can find the Wired article here.
Corn, Ham and the Women of CIRM
From Hollywood's Sherry Lansing to Davis' Claire Pomeroy, patient advocate Don Reed covered them all. Wonder Women, he called them.
Reed is the irrepressible patient advocate who doggedly attends almost every meeting involving the California stem cell agency and then goes on to fight the stem cell fight nationwide via the Internet.
On his blog – stemcellbattles.com – the July 31 posting involved the women on CIRM's Oversight Committee. Reed did not mention the women who staff the agency, including the two who are now in charge of the effort. But he probably will.
With Lansing, Reed reached into the past and rented a movie, Rio Lobo, in which she appeared with John Wayne. Lansing's heart-of-gold character did away with a bad guy who had done her wrong, but then helped Wayne to walk again.
Reed himself is a goodhearted fellow. Some people might think his writing style a little corny, but I once had a high school speech teacher who constantly reminded me, “Corn is better than ham any day of the week.”
Reed is the irrepressible patient advocate who doggedly attends almost every meeting involving the California stem cell agency and then goes on to fight the stem cell fight nationwide via the Internet.
On his blog – stemcellbattles.com – the July 31 posting involved the women on CIRM's Oversight Committee. Reed did not mention the women who staff the agency, including the two who are now in charge of the effort. But he probably will.
With Lansing, Reed reached into the past and rented a movie, Rio Lobo, in which she appeared with John Wayne. Lansing's heart-of-gold character did away with a bad guy who had done her wrong, but then helped Wayne to walk again.
Reed himself is a goodhearted fellow. Some people might think his writing style a little corny, but I once had a high school speech teacher who constantly reminded me, “Corn is better than ham any day of the week.”
A $100 Million Collaborative Effort
CIRM Oversight Committee members Ed Penhoet and Claire Pomeroy enjoyed a $100 million day earlier this week in Sacramento.
The occasion was the announcement that the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation was giving the money to UC Davis to establish a nursing school. Penhoet is president of the foundation. Pomeroy is dean of the medical school at UC Davis.
The Moore donation is the largest ever made to UC Davis and one of the largest ever for the University of California system.
Gordon Moore is one of the founders of Intel. His son, Ken, was present for the announcement. A story written by Bill Lindelof and Dorsey Griffith reported the following:
The occasion was the announcement that the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation was giving the money to UC Davis to establish a nursing school. Penhoet is president of the foundation. Pomeroy is dean of the medical school at UC Davis.
The Moore donation is the largest ever made to UC Davis and one of the largest ever for the University of California system.
Gordon Moore is one of the founders of Intel. His son, Ken, was present for the announcement. A story written by Bill Lindelof and Dorsey Griffith reported the following:
"He (Ken) said a nurse came into his mother's room and told her it was time for a shot. Betty Moore balked, but the nurse insisted.Sharon Stello of the Davis Enterprise reported:
"'Turns out she got the insulin shot that should have gone to the patient in the neighboring bed,' said Ken Moore. 'They nearly had two deaths out of one medical error. That was the start of her really being interested in nursing care.'"
"UCD spokeswoman Lisa Lapin said initial connections between the foundation and the Davis campus were made between Claire Pomeroy, UCD vice chancellor for human health sciences and dean of the medical school, and Penhoet, both of whom serve on the California Stem Cell Commission(sic). They started talking about mutual visions for nursing education, and the conversation evolved into the grant."
CIRM Director Nova Taking Her Firm Public
Tina Nova, a director of the California stem cell agency, is looking for a big payday when the company she heads, Genoptix, goes public, seeking to raise $86 million.
The Carlsbad, Ca., firm has filed documents with the federal government announcing its plans for an initial public offering. Genoptix, which reported its first quarterly profit this year, provides laboratory and diagnostic services to hematologists and oncologists. It is backed by venture capitalists including
Enterprise Partners, Chicago Growth Partners, William Blair Capital Partners, Alliance Technology Ventures, Tullis-Dickerson, Excelsior Venture Partners and others.
Nova is one of 29 members of the Oversight Committee for CIRM. The IPO filing, which has lots of interesting business details, can be found here.
The Carlsbad, Ca., firm has filed documents with the federal government announcing its plans for an initial public offering. Genoptix, which reported its first quarterly profit this year, provides laboratory and diagnostic services to hematologists and oncologists. It is backed by venture capitalists including
Enterprise Partners, Chicago Growth Partners, William Blair Capital Partners, Alliance Technology Ventures, Tullis-Dickerson, Excelsior Venture Partners and others.
Nova is one of 29 members of the Oversight Committee for CIRM. The IPO filing, which has lots of interesting business details, can be found here.
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
CIRM, Entropy and the Presidential Search
The California stem cell agency entered its fourth month today without a permanent president, although its directors knew last December that the post would be vacant by summer.
On Monday, Robert Klein, chairman of the agency's Oversight Committee, told the California Stem Cell Report that he expected the search to move forward “in a material way” at next Wednesday's meeting of CIRM directors. However, he did not predict a decision on either a candidate or a new salary for the president.
Klein said he was “committed to getting absolutely the right person.” He said the search is not taking long when compared 12 to 18 month efforts to find top academic or university executives.
The Oversight Committee met three times in unusual, teleconference meetings between the end of June and the end of July to consider candidates and compensation. But those meetings, conducted mainly in private, ended with no public action.
The presidential search is not on the public portion of the Oversight Committee's agenda Wednesday, but the matter can be taken up during the group's scheduled personnel session, which also will be behind closed doors.
Following last week's meeting of the CIRM standards group, Jeff Sheehy, a member of the Oversight Committee, said in an interview that compensation is a significant factor in the search, which apparently involves candidates from academe. He noted that CIRM cannot provide special housing allowances that are often part of the compensation mix in academic recruitment efforts. Nor can the institute provide loans to its employees. Academic employment also can provide tenure and other financial opportunities that would not be available to a CIRM president.
Since the beginning of May, two capable CIRM staffers have picked former president Zach Hall's responsibilities on an interim basis. But earlier this year, we pointed out that organizations with lame duck CEOs and interim presidents can easily slip into drift. No one wants to make a decision that would tie the hands of a new president. Hiring new staffers can also be difficult. While it is hard to quantify the impact, it can be quite harmful. More than one director has voiced that concern.
As far back as last January, Oversight Committee member Michael Goldberg warned fellow directors against complacency. Goldberg has more than a nodding acquaintance with such issues as a venture capitalist who directs life science investments for Mohr Davidow Ventures of Menlo Park, Ca.
He said,
On Monday, Robert Klein, chairman of the agency's Oversight Committee, told the California Stem Cell Report that he expected the search to move forward “in a material way” at next Wednesday's meeting of CIRM directors. However, he did not predict a decision on either a candidate or a new salary for the president.
Klein said he was “committed to getting absolutely the right person.” He said the search is not taking long when compared 12 to 18 month efforts to find top academic or university executives.
The Oversight Committee met three times in unusual, teleconference meetings between the end of June and the end of July to consider candidates and compensation. But those meetings, conducted mainly in private, ended with no public action.
The presidential search is not on the public portion of the Oversight Committee's agenda Wednesday, but the matter can be taken up during the group's scheduled personnel session, which also will be behind closed doors.
Following last week's meeting of the CIRM standards group, Jeff Sheehy, a member of the Oversight Committee, said in an interview that compensation is a significant factor in the search, which apparently involves candidates from academe. He noted that CIRM cannot provide special housing allowances that are often part of the compensation mix in academic recruitment efforts. Nor can the institute provide loans to its employees. Academic employment also can provide tenure and other financial opportunities that would not be available to a CIRM president.
Since the beginning of May, two capable CIRM staffers have picked former president Zach Hall's responsibilities on an interim basis. But earlier this year, we pointed out that organizations with lame duck CEOs and interim presidents can easily slip into drift. No one wants to make a decision that would tie the hands of a new president. Hiring new staffers can also be difficult. While it is hard to quantify the impact, it can be quite harmful. More than one director has voiced that concern.
As far back as last January, Oversight Committee member Michael Goldberg warned fellow directors against complacency. Goldberg has more than a nodding acquaintance with such issues as a venture capitalist who directs life science investments for Mohr Davidow Ventures of Menlo Park, Ca.
He said,
"There's a whole organization there that's been charged with an enormous responsibility of administering the research apparatus of the CIRM, and it's leaderless. I don't like working for an organization that's leaderless. I say leaderless, I don't mean that in the sense it doesn't have a chair engaged and vice chair engaged and (outgoing president Zach Hall's) engagement, but it's not the same as an organization that's moving forward.
"There's entropy in my experience at this stage of an organization's life with a leader who's announced his departure....That should give us actually an increased sense of urgency, if anything. so I'd like to do everything we can to fast track the process without sacrificing any of the transparency and engagement with stakeholders that I think we're all committed to."
CIRM Directors to Address Business IP and Lab Grants
Directors of the California stem cell agency meet next Wednesday with a $220 million matter foremost in their minds, but other issues, such as intellectual property rules for grants to businesses, also are up for action.
Criteria and procedures for the $220 million lab grant RFA – the largest single grant effort by CIRM – are likely to dominate the discussion. The meeting is expected to be the last stop before grant applications are sought. California stem cell Chairman Robert Klein is talking about approving the first stage of the grants in January(see item below).
Proposed payback requirements for businesses that receive grants from CIRM, which are part of the IP regulations, are up for possible action. The agenda is vague, but if I were a business interested in having a voice on what could be a multimillion dollar matter, I would want to be present for the Wednesday meeting in San Francisco.
The agenda also includes a proposal for pre-approval of certain Japanese stem cell lines in CIRM-funded research and changes aimed at making it easier to do research in California on reprogramming of somatic cells.
One cryptic agenda item lists consideration of an unspecified proposal from the California State University system. No details were available on the agenda at the time of this writing, but we are attempting to find out more.
Criteria and procedures for the $220 million lab grant RFA – the largest single grant effort by CIRM – are likely to dominate the discussion. The meeting is expected to be the last stop before grant applications are sought. California stem cell Chairman Robert Klein is talking about approving the first stage of the grants in January(see item below).
Proposed payback requirements for businesses that receive grants from CIRM, which are part of the IP regulations, are up for possible action. The agenda is vague, but if I were a business interested in having a voice on what could be a multimillion dollar matter, I would want to be present for the Wednesday meeting in San Francisco.
The agenda also includes a proposal for pre-approval of certain Japanese stem cell lines in CIRM-funded research and changes aimed at making it easier to do research in California on reprogramming of somatic cells.
One cryptic agenda item lists consideration of an unspecified proposal from the California State University system. No details were available on the agenda at the time of this writing, but we are attempting to find out more.
Monday, July 30, 2007
Stem Cell Lab Building Plan Heads for Approval Next Week
The California stem cell agency Monday moved forward on its largest single grant effort – a $220 million proposal for new research labs – with hopes that some construction could begin as early as next January.
The Facilities Working Group of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) sent criteria, evaluation standards and grant review procedures for the lab grants to the agency's Oversight Committee for approval when it meets Aug. 8 in San Francisco.
Major universities and research institutions in California, ranging from Stanford to UC San Diego, are lining up for the money. Some have been planning since November 2004 when Prop. 71 created CIRM and provided it with $3 billion in funding, the largest single financial source for human embryonic stem cell research in the world.
The group did not settle on a firm timetable, but Robert Klein, chairman of the Oversight Committee, said he expected to see initial approval of the grants in early January. He said that would mean that some institutions could begin construction shortly thereafter.
That would be possible under a new, two-step grant review process approved by the working group Monday. It calls for the scientific component of the proposals to be approved first via the scientific grants group with facilities group action later. Klein said high rankings at the first stage of approval (at a yet to be scheduled Oversight meeting early in January) would permit some ambitious institutions to begin work. Jeff Sheehy, a member of the Oversight Committee and the facilities group, said the new process could speed up final approval by at least a month compared to the smaller, shared lab grant review completed earlier this year.
The facilities group also indirectly addressed the ticklish question of dividing the grant money between smaller, less-established institutions and the heavyweights of stem cell research. The proposed grant rules call for applicants to choose as many as three scientific areas where they believe they have strength: basic and discovery research, preclinical research, preclinical development and clinical research. The areas were dubbed, respectively, Element X, Element Y and Element Z.
If a university identifies itself as having strength in all three elements (XYZ), it will compete against other similar XYZ institutions as a “CIRM Institute.” If it has strength in two elements, it will compete as “CIRM Center of Excellence.” If strength is in one area, the competition will be among other single-strength “CIRM Special Programs.”
The grant process places emphasis on value, leverage and urgency, which account for 70 out of 100 possible points. The urgency component (20 points) requires a two-year construction timetable with financial penalties for failing to meet deadlines. The value component( 25 points) calls for a “good return to the taxpayer,” among other things. The leverage component (also 25 points) is aimed at forcing the institutions to come up with major financial support for their proposals in addition to CIRM funding.
Several times the discussion focused on ambiguities in the criteria such as “facility assets,” “enhanced capability” and “reasonable and necessary.” Some of these are likely to be refined as a final RFA is developed. But Klein told the small audience at today's meeting at CIRM headquarters in San Francisco, “We're going to make a lot of subjective decisions.” It was a refrain he came back to several times.
Following the meeting, when we asked him about the difficulties posed for applicants by ambiguous terms, he said they do create challenges. But he said the criteria is designed to “accommodate the creativity” that California institutions have. He and others on the facilities group said they wanted to provide ample opportunity for imaginative approaches to lab construction, management and collaboration.
The facilities group also approved a rule aimed at preventing double-dipping in the grant process. It permits only one application per institution with funding for a single project on a single site. This means, for example, that if a legally constituted consortium applies for a grant, members of that consortium cannot apply for another grant separately.
John M. Simpson, stem cell project director of the Foundation for Consumer and Taxpayer Rights and a longtime attendee at CIRM sessions, praised the overall process for the lab grants. Often a critic of CIRM and the grant process at one point, he said the facilities group meetings benefited both the agency and applicants, generating a higher participation from the applicants/public compared to many other CIRM sessions. That “enhances the output,” he said.
Simpson is correct about the larger turnout, but even that is small, ranging from 30 to 40 persons at its peak during the recent round of meetings. What surprised us is the fact that some potential applicants did not regularly attend the sessions. That means they will miss important nuances that are not available via online transcripts and Power Point presentations. As for attendance by the general public, nobody bothered, but that is not much different than public proceedings at any other state agency.
To see more specifics of what the facilities group considered, see this location. The document is likely to be reposted in several days with changes from today's meeting as part of the Oversight Committee agenda.
The Facilities Working Group of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) sent criteria, evaluation standards and grant review procedures for the lab grants to the agency's Oversight Committee for approval when it meets Aug. 8 in San Francisco.
Major universities and research institutions in California, ranging from Stanford to UC San Diego, are lining up for the money. Some have been planning since November 2004 when Prop. 71 created CIRM and provided it with $3 billion in funding, the largest single financial source for human embryonic stem cell research in the world.
The group did not settle on a firm timetable, but Robert Klein, chairman of the Oversight Committee, said he expected to see initial approval of the grants in early January. He said that would mean that some institutions could begin construction shortly thereafter.
That would be possible under a new, two-step grant review process approved by the working group Monday. It calls for the scientific component of the proposals to be approved first via the scientific grants group with facilities group action later. Klein said high rankings at the first stage of approval (at a yet to be scheduled Oversight meeting early in January) would permit some ambitious institutions to begin work. Jeff Sheehy, a member of the Oversight Committee and the facilities group, said the new process could speed up final approval by at least a month compared to the smaller, shared lab grant review completed earlier this year.
The facilities group also indirectly addressed the ticklish question of dividing the grant money between smaller, less-established institutions and the heavyweights of stem cell research. The proposed grant rules call for applicants to choose as many as three scientific areas where they believe they have strength: basic and discovery research, preclinical research, preclinical development and clinical research. The areas were dubbed, respectively, Element X, Element Y and Element Z.
If a university identifies itself as having strength in all three elements (XYZ), it will compete against other similar XYZ institutions as a “CIRM Institute.” If it has strength in two elements, it will compete as “CIRM Center of Excellence.” If strength is in one area, the competition will be among other single-strength “CIRM Special Programs.”
The grant process places emphasis on value, leverage and urgency, which account for 70 out of 100 possible points. The urgency component (20 points) requires a two-year construction timetable with financial penalties for failing to meet deadlines. The value component( 25 points) calls for a “good return to the taxpayer,” among other things. The leverage component (also 25 points) is aimed at forcing the institutions to come up with major financial support for their proposals in addition to CIRM funding.
Several times the discussion focused on ambiguities in the criteria such as “facility assets,” “enhanced capability” and “reasonable and necessary.” Some of these are likely to be refined as a final RFA is developed. But Klein told the small audience at today's meeting at CIRM headquarters in San Francisco, “We're going to make a lot of subjective decisions.” It was a refrain he came back to several times.
Following the meeting, when we asked him about the difficulties posed for applicants by ambiguous terms, he said they do create challenges. But he said the criteria is designed to “accommodate the creativity” that California institutions have. He and others on the facilities group said they wanted to provide ample opportunity for imaginative approaches to lab construction, management and collaboration.
The facilities group also approved a rule aimed at preventing double-dipping in the grant process. It permits only one application per institution with funding for a single project on a single site. This means, for example, that if a legally constituted consortium applies for a grant, members of that consortium cannot apply for another grant separately.
John M. Simpson, stem cell project director of the Foundation for Consumer and Taxpayer Rights and a longtime attendee at CIRM sessions, praised the overall process for the lab grants. Often a critic of CIRM and the grant process at one point, he said the facilities group meetings benefited both the agency and applicants, generating a higher participation from the applicants/public compared to many other CIRM sessions. That “enhances the output,” he said.
Simpson is correct about the larger turnout, but even that is small, ranging from 30 to 40 persons at its peak during the recent round of meetings. What surprised us is the fact that some potential applicants did not regularly attend the sessions. That means they will miss important nuances that are not available via online transcripts and Power Point presentations. As for attendance by the general public, nobody bothered, but that is not much different than public proceedings at any other state agency.
To see more specifics of what the facilities group considered, see this location. The document is likely to be reposted in several days with changes from today's meeting as part of the Oversight Committee agenda.
Golden Eggs on The Stem Cell Blog
Time to move off this channel briefly and visit The Stem Cell Blog (published by Chris Scott of Stanford) to read a guest posting from this writer on the $220 million lab grant program at the California stem cell agency. It begins:
“You could call it a stem cell variation of the chicken and egg question.A little later this afternoon we will have an update right here on this site concerning this morning's developments at CIRM. The Facilities Working Group modified the rules for making the lab grants and moved them along to the full Oversight Committee for consideration Aug. 8. The intention is to see at least some institutions begin construction on their approved facilities in January.
“But in this case, it involves edifices – not eggs. And researchers – not roosters. Which is more important?”
Sunday, July 29, 2007
ACT, NIH and No Go Federal Funding
Despite all the hoopla on the Potomac about stem cell research, don't expect the federal situation to change any time soon and eliminate the justification for California's own $3 billion stem cell research effort.
The latest evidence for that came in a piece Sunday by Rick Weiss of the Washington Post. It demonstrated the hidebound nature of the NIH as well as the constraints it faces. The piece did not have to mention NIH's tight financial situation.
Here are the first few paragraphs of Weiss' story:
(Editor's note: ACT is headquartered in Alameda, California – not in Massachusetts. Why is it in the Golden State? Because that is where the money is. We should also note that a public relations agency for ACT is sending copies of the Weiss story to various interested parties, probably throughout the country. Nothing wrong with that. If you have a drum, you probably should beat it.)
The latest evidence for that came in a piece Sunday by Rick Weiss of the Washington Post. It demonstrated the hidebound nature of the NIH as well as the constraints it faces. The piece did not have to mention NIH's tight financial situation.
Here are the first few paragraphs of Weiss' story:
"With the active encouragement of the Bush administration, U.S. scientists in the past year have developed several methods for creating embryonic stem cells without having to destroy human embryos.Even with a change of administration in 2009 and a Democratic Congress, it will take a considerable amount of bureaucratic shuffling to chart a new NIH and federal course on embryonic stem cell research. Then additional funds would have to become available or be taken from existing research – an effort that would be strongly resisted. Some would argue at that point that states are already handsomely financing ESC research, and more is not needed from the feds. Even if funds become become available, then the NIH has to go through another lengthy award process.
"But some who now wish to test their alternatively derived cells have found themselves stymied by an unexpected barrier: President Bush's stem cell policy.
"The 2001 policy says that federal funds may not be used to study embryonic stem cells created after Aug. 9 of that year. It is based on the assumption that the only way to make the cells is by destroying human embryos -- a truism in 2001 but not any longer.
"As a result, the National Institutes of Health recently refused to consider a grant application for what would have been the first federal study to compare several of the new, less politically contentious stem cell lines.
"'This is not the way to make good health policy,'" said Robert Lanza, the frustrated vice president for research and scientific development at Advanced Cell Technology (ACT) in Worcester(see editor's note below), Mass. Lanza submitted the study proposal with stem cell experts from several major research labs."
(Editor's note: ACT is headquartered in Alameda, California – not in Massachusetts. Why is it in the Golden State? Because that is where the money is. We should also note that a public relations agency for ACT is sending copies of the Weiss story to various interested parties, probably throughout the country. Nothing wrong with that. If you have a drum, you probably should beat it.)
Friday, July 27, 2007
Stanford's Chris Scott and His New Stem Cell Blog
A snappy new blog on stem cell issues has popped up at Stanford University, complete with a reading list and podcasts.
Called "The Stem Cell Blog," it is published by Chris Scott, director of Stanford's Program on Stem Cells in Society and author of the book, "Stem Cell Now." (You can find a picture of Scott here.)
The first post dates back to June 26 with a graphic account about research with live pigs. More recently, the blog has a post based on work by Susan Stayn, Stanford's state stem cell legal expert. Called “What Color is Your State?” it begins like this:
We have added The Stem Cell Blog to our links on the left of this site.
Called "The Stem Cell Blog," it is published by Chris Scott, director of Stanford's Program on Stem Cells in Society and author of the book, "Stem Cell Now." (You can find a picture of Scott here.)
The first post dates back to June 26 with a graphic account about research with live pigs. More recently, the blog has a post based on work by Susan Stayn, Stanford's state stem cell legal expert. Called “What Color is Your State?” it begins like this:
"Taking a cue from Homeland Security, we’ll periodically publish a color-coded ranking of American states and their legislative positions on embryonic stem cell research."You can also download the state rankings in a PDF file.
We have added The Stem Cell Blog to our links on the left of this site.
Weekend Reading: Guide to a $220 Million Giveaway
For all of you stem cell lab hopefuls, the California stem cell agency has posted 29 pages of Power Point presentations that will be used during Monday's meeting on the $220 million program.
It includes the latest thinking from the “interested parties” meeting earlier this week as well as other fresh developments. We have not yet digested the material, which is a bit complex. But if you have a horse in this race, check it out. Monday's meeting is the last before the massive program comes up at the full Oversight Committee session Aug. 8.
Here is the link to the documents.
It includes the latest thinking from the “interested parties” meeting earlier this week as well as other fresh developments. We have not yet digested the material, which is a bit complex. But if you have a horse in this race, check it out. Monday's meeting is the last before the massive program comes up at the full Oversight Committee session Aug. 8.
Here is the link to the documents.
CIRM Group Gives Nod to Japanese Cell Lines
The California stem cell agency Friday moved to add some Japanese stem cell lines to two already approved foreign lines and to make it easier for California researchers to engage in experiments to reprogram somatic stem cells.
Meeting in San Francisco in a national teleconference session, the Standards Working Group made positive recommendations in both areas that will be taken up Aug. 8 by the agency's Oversight Committee.
The Japanese lines are ones that are derived under the “Japanese Guidelines for Derivation and Utilization of Human Embryonic Stem Cells.” Geoff Lomax, senior CIRM officer for the standards group, said researchers are seeking as many lines as possible. He also said a delegation of Japanese scientists had requested inclusion of the lines. UK and Canadian stem cell lines already enjoy pre-approval.
The group also discussed the question of varying deadlines for using embryos for derivation of stem cells. Prop. 71 sets a deadline of 12 days after cell division. The Japanese deadline is 14, as is the UK, according to testimony. Bernie Lo, chairman of the standards group, noted that it is not currently
actually possible to derive embryonic stem cells beyond 12 days.
After some discussion, Lo asked CIRM staff to research the issues involved so that CIRM can act quickly when derivations can occur after 12 days.
The group additionally recommended that CIRM permit reprogramming experiments on existing somatic stem cells that do not necessarily meet the informed consent requirements intended to be used for new cell lines. Ann James, senior university counsel for Stanford University, said researchers at her school wanted maximum flexibility.
Kevin Eggan of Harvard, a member of the CIRM group, said such cell lines have been in use for perhaps as long as a decade and represented a valuable starting point for research into how to reprogram adult cells into pluripotent ones – the characteristic that makes human embryonic stem cells so valuable. Others noted that it would be all but impossible to replicate today's informed consent requirements for those older lines.
Patricia Olson, scientific program officer at CIRM, said permitting use of the older lines would only allow CIRM-funded researchers to do what others already do outside of California.
Background material from CIRM on these issues can be found here.
Meeting in San Francisco in a national teleconference session, the Standards Working Group made positive recommendations in both areas that will be taken up Aug. 8 by the agency's Oversight Committee.
The Japanese lines are ones that are derived under the “Japanese Guidelines for Derivation and Utilization of Human Embryonic Stem Cells.” Geoff Lomax, senior CIRM officer for the standards group, said researchers are seeking as many lines as possible. He also said a delegation of Japanese scientists had requested inclusion of the lines. UK and Canadian stem cell lines already enjoy pre-approval.
The group also discussed the question of varying deadlines for using embryos for derivation of stem cells. Prop. 71 sets a deadline of 12 days after cell division. The Japanese deadline is 14, as is the UK, according to testimony. Bernie Lo, chairman of the standards group, noted that it is not currently
actually possible to derive embryonic stem cells beyond 12 days.
After some discussion, Lo asked CIRM staff to research the issues involved so that CIRM can act quickly when derivations can occur after 12 days.
The group additionally recommended that CIRM permit reprogramming experiments on existing somatic stem cells that do not necessarily meet the informed consent requirements intended to be used for new cell lines. Ann James, senior university counsel for Stanford University, said researchers at her school wanted maximum flexibility.
Kevin Eggan of Harvard, a member of the CIRM group, said such cell lines have been in use for perhaps as long as a decade and represented a valuable starting point for research into how to reprogram adult cells into pluripotent ones – the characteristic that makes human embryonic stem cells so valuable. Others noted that it would be all but impossible to replicate today's informed consent requirements for those older lines.
Patricia Olson, scientific program officer at CIRM, said permitting use of the older lines would only allow CIRM-funded researchers to do what others already do outside of California.
Background material from CIRM on these issues can be found here.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Thomson Report Carried by Nature, Chronicle of Higher Education
Nature magazine and the Chronicle of Higher Education have picked up a report from this blog on Jamie Thomson's ties to UC Santa Barbara.
The report in Nature briefly discussed the flap involving the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation's ownership on patents originating from Thomson's work on human embryonic stem cells.
The Chronicle's story on its news blog cited the Nature item as its source. Both publications also mentioned this blogger's report, noting that the Thomson connection helped UCSB win a $2.3 million grant from CIRM.
The report in Nature briefly discussed the flap involving the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation's ownership on patents originating from Thomson's work on human embryonic stem cells.
The Chronicle's story on its news blog cited the Nature item as its source. Both publications also mentioned this blogger's report, noting that the Thomson connection helped UCSB win a $2.3 million grant from CIRM.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
CIRM Grants: Checks Not in the Mail, Squeaky Clean Review Underway
Directors of the California stem cell agency have approved $170 million in grants so far this year, but none of the money has yet reached researchers, universities or other recipients.
In early June, directors were told that the first wave of the funds -- $45 million approved five months ago -- was likely to receive the administrative go-ahead before the beginning of July. But that schedule has gone by the boards, and it is not clear exactly when the checks will ultimately be sent.
At the heart of the issue is the review of the details of the grants that occurs following their approval by the Oversight Committee.
Arlene Chiu, interim chief scientific officer for CIRM, told the committee last month, "We strive to be good stewards of the public's money."
Each one of the 117 proposals is examined by CIRM staff for compliance with its rules and state law. Slowing the process are the newness of the procedures, the small size of the CIRM staff(about 25)and even the speed at which the recipient institutions respond to requests for additional information. It is fair to say that universities do not necessarily act speedily even when millions of revenue are on the line.
CIRM has also been without a permanent president since the beginning of May, raising the possibility that the process might be moving faster with a permanent CEO in place. However, Dale Carlson, chief communications officer for CIRM, said, "I’ll tell you categorically that’s not a factor."
We asked Carlson about the funding process. Here is his reply verbatim:
"The length of time reflects several factors. First, we are looking at a large number of approved grant applications, particularly relative to the staff available to conduct the administrative review.
"Second, the requested costs on every application need to be carefully reviewed to ensure that they are accurate and in keeping with our policies. Facilities and indirect cost reimbursement rates also need to be checked, verified, and may need to be adjusted to fall in line with prevailing rates from other national grant-making institutions.
"This too is proving more time-consuming than we'd originally estimated.
"Third, some institutions are more prompt than others in responding to requests for documentation.
"This is still a new exercise for us. We're being very careful and thorough to ensure we get it right. It should go faster in the future.
"Fortunately, the recipient institutions understand that we are working with a new and small staff, and are by and large being very patient with our process. I think they share our interest in seeing this exercise properly completed, as it should generate efficiencies down the road.
"We are making every effort to send out all the notices of grant award (NGAs) in the coming weeks. The release of funds by the State Controller's Office follows the return of signed certification statements, and we obviously have no control over how quickly institutions turn those around."
Caution and care are to be commended in the case of this review. CIRM is still an infant organization. Laying a good groundwork for the future remains paramount. Plus financial foulups are viewed harshly in the media. Witness the stories earlier this spring about expensive lunches by some CIRM directors, a trivial expense that some reporters focused on in their stories about a state audit of CIRM. Bigger numbers would generate bigger and more unfavorable stories with a negative impact on CIRM's reputation.
In early June, directors were told that the first wave of the funds -- $45 million approved five months ago -- was likely to receive the administrative go-ahead before the beginning of July. But that schedule has gone by the boards, and it is not clear exactly when the checks will ultimately be sent.
At the heart of the issue is the review of the details of the grants that occurs following their approval by the Oversight Committee.
Arlene Chiu, interim chief scientific officer for CIRM, told the committee last month, "We strive to be good stewards of the public's money."
Each one of the 117 proposals is examined by CIRM staff for compliance with its rules and state law. Slowing the process are the newness of the procedures, the small size of the CIRM staff(about 25)and even the speed at which the recipient institutions respond to requests for additional information. It is fair to say that universities do not necessarily act speedily even when millions of revenue are on the line.
CIRM has also been without a permanent president since the beginning of May, raising the possibility that the process might be moving faster with a permanent CEO in place. However, Dale Carlson, chief communications officer for CIRM, said, "I’ll tell you categorically that’s not a factor."
We asked Carlson about the funding process. Here is his reply verbatim:
"The length of time reflects several factors. First, we are looking at a large number of approved grant applications, particularly relative to the staff available to conduct the administrative review.
"Second, the requested costs on every application need to be carefully reviewed to ensure that they are accurate and in keeping with our policies. Facilities and indirect cost reimbursement rates also need to be checked, verified, and may need to be adjusted to fall in line with prevailing rates from other national grant-making institutions.
"This too is proving more time-consuming than we'd originally estimated.
"Third, some institutions are more prompt than others in responding to requests for documentation.
"This is still a new exercise for us. We're being very careful and thorough to ensure we get it right. It should go faster in the future.
"Fortunately, the recipient institutions understand that we are working with a new and small staff, and are by and large being very patient with our process. I think they share our interest in seeing this exercise properly completed, as it should generate efficiencies down the road.
"We are making every effort to send out all the notices of grant award (NGAs) in the coming weeks. The release of funds by the State Controller's Office follows the return of signed certification statements, and we obviously have no control over how quickly institutions turn those around."
Caution and care are to be commended in the case of this review. CIRM is still an infant organization. Laying a good groundwork for the future remains paramount. Plus financial foulups are viewed harshly in the media. Witness the stories earlier this spring about expensive lunches by some CIRM directors, a trivial expense that some reporters focused on in their stories about a state audit of CIRM. Bigger numbers would generate bigger and more unfavorable stories with a negative impact on CIRM's reputation.
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
CIRM Presidential Search: No Announcement Yet
Directors of the California stem cell agency failed to take public action today for the third time in the last month in their seven month search for a new president.
No announcement was made following the closed door session of the Oversight Committee. The last words – "progress is being made" – came from stem cell chairman Robert Klein on July 12. Klein had expected to fill the position by June.
No announcement was made following the closed door session of the Oversight Committee. The last words – "progress is being made" – came from stem cell chairman Robert Klein on July 12. Klein had expected to fill the position by June.
Lab Grant Evaluation Standards
The evaluation standards for the $220 million lab grant program have now been posted on the CIRM website and are available here.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Upcoming This Week: Japanese Stem Cell Lines, Lab Grants and Presidential Search
From $220 million in lab grants and Japanese stem cell lines to the latest chapter in the search for a CEO, the California stem cell agency is set for a busy week.
We want to point out the background material prepared for the Standards Working Group meeting on Friday. Posted last week well before the meeting, the paper neatly summarized the history behind the matters being considered, touched on the issues involved and offered up draft language to deal with the problem in two cases. It was a good example of staff work that improves the decision-making process.
The standards group, which regulates CIRM-funded research, will consider whether to include some Japanese stem cell lines as "approved" for study. They would join some lines from Great Britain and Canada as ready to use. That means that research using them does not have to go through a more lengthy review process. Specifically, the Japanese lines being considered are ones derived under the "Japanese Guidelines for Derivation and Utilization of Human Embryonic Stem Cells."
The group is also scheduled to consider a problem in connection with informed consent requirements and research involving somatic cell lines. The agency's regulations created a situation in which "existing somatic cell lines obtained with informed consent may not be available for reprogramming experiments unless consent was obtained in accordance with the exact requirements of section 100100 (of CIRM regulations)."
The staff report said,
On Tuesday, the Oversight Committee will convene for the third time in a month for a special, teleconference meeting to consider presidential compensation and candidates. They are legally equipped to come to a decision in their seven-month effort. But our bet is that no new president will be announced.
We want to point out the background material prepared for the Standards Working Group meeting on Friday. Posted last week well before the meeting, the paper neatly summarized the history behind the matters being considered, touched on the issues involved and offered up draft language to deal with the problem in two cases. It was a good example of staff work that improves the decision-making process.
The standards group, which regulates CIRM-funded research, will consider whether to include some Japanese stem cell lines as "approved" for study. They would join some lines from Great Britain and Canada as ready to use. That means that research using them does not have to go through a more lengthy review process. Specifically, the Japanese lines being considered are ones derived under the "Japanese Guidelines for Derivation and Utilization of Human Embryonic Stem Cells."
The group is also scheduled to consider a problem in connection with informed consent requirements and research involving somatic cell lines. The agency's regulations created a situation in which "existing somatic cell lines obtained with informed consent may not be available for reprogramming experiments unless consent was obtained in accordance with the exact requirements of section 100100 (of CIRM regulations)."
The staff report said,
"The SWG might consider a more flexible standard for use of somatic cells. Interviews with leading researchers suggest the inability to utilize commonly available commercial somatic cells (non-covered stem cell lines) lines would limit CIRM-funded researchers from attempting to replicate studies."On Wednesday, CIRM will conduct a session for "interested parties" on the $220 million lab grant effort. Proposed evaluation standards are scheduled to be posted Monday on the CIRM web site. Earlier, the agency posted the criteria and scoring. On July 30, the Facilities Working Group will wrestle with the subject once again, but the ball is rolling faster, so you applicants should pay close attention. Don't be shy about communicating with the agency if you can't be at the meetings.
On Tuesday, the Oversight Committee will convene for the third time in a month for a special, teleconference meeting to consider presidential compensation and candidates. They are legally equipped to come to a decision in their seven-month effort. But our bet is that no new president will be announced.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Nature Magazine Trumpets California 'Upstart'
The California stem cell agency's $85 million faculty awards program received some attention today on the website of Nature magazine.
A brief piece by Monya Baker noted that the program had been announced by "an upstart state-funded initiative to make California a stem-cell research hub."
She wrote:
A brief piece by Monya Baker noted that the program had been announced by "an upstart state-funded initiative to make California a stem-cell research hub."
She wrote:
"US biomedics moving from postdoc to independent research often struggle to find stable sources of funding. New investigators receive only 6% of US National Institutes of Health (NIH) R01 awards, the multi-year grants that US universities rely on. Similar to R01, the CIRM grants will fund direct project costs of $300,000 for academics and $400,000 for clinicians. Worries over money hamper long-term thinking, says Xianmin Zeng of the Buck Institute in Novato, California, who plans to apply. Many foundations give only small amounts of money over one or two years, she says. 'For young investigators to get a stable environment, they need a stable foundation,' Zeng says."
Klein Rebuffed in Lobbying Effort for New Stem Cell Nonprofit
California stem cell Chairman Robert Klein -- and associates -- Tuesday failed in their initial efforts to secure a land use change that would have swapped Northern California farmland for a new, nonprofit stem cell research institute that Klein would have chaired.
The proposal was put off by Yolo County supervisors during an angry meeting, reported Mary Lynne Vellinga of The Sacramento Bee. However, the proposal is not likely to vanish. Its chief backer, developer Angelo Tsakopoulos, is a persistent businessman. The stem cell proposal was one of three land use proposals that the supervisors were considering. Vellinga wrote:
The proposal was put off by Yolo County supervisors during an angry meeting, reported Mary Lynne Vellinga of The Sacramento Bee. However, the proposal is not likely to vanish. Its chief backer, developer Angelo Tsakopoulos, is a persistent businessman. The stem cell proposal was one of three land use proposals that the supervisors were considering. Vellinga wrote:
"Tuesday's vote shelves -- at least for now -- a proposal by Sacramento developer Angelo K. Tsakopoulos to build an incubator for stem cell research just south of Interstate 80 outside Davis, and to fund it with profits from the construction of an unspecified number of homes.For more on this issue, see the Yolo item below. Searching on the label Yolo will also turn up additional items.
"The county has been considering inclusion of some 1,500 acres, about 60 percent of the land owned by Tsakopoulos, for an 'innovation corridor' targeting life science and biotechnolgy.
"A bevy of stem cell experts, researchers and accident victims in wheelchairs -- including Ms. Wheelchair California -- turned out Tuesday to support the idea.
"'With your approval, the suffering people would have hope,' said Roman Reed, who was paralyzed when he broke his neck playing football. A state law named after Reed sets aside money for paralysis research.
Robert Klein, chairman of the state-funded California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, also made an appearance. He has been working with Tsakopoulos to promote the idea of a center, which he plans to head.
The supervisors took pains to stress that they would love to see a stem cell research center built in Yolo County but don't support the idea of building housing on the valuable farmland next to the Yolo Bypass. “'The money (for the center) comes from building the houses; that's not something I can support in that area, no matter how much I care,' Thomson said.”
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Correction
The item below incorrectly said CIRM is scheduled to approve grants at a rate of $54,000 an hour this year. The correct figure is $29,000 an hour. The $54,000 rate included the major lab grants, which do not appear likely to be approved this year.
Monday, July 16, 2007
Klein, Chimeras and the Yolo Land Deal
In the eyes of some, the unusual lobbying by the chairman of the $3 billion California stem cell agency on behalf of an effort to swap farmland for a new, nonprofit stem cell research institute is not necessarily unethical or inappropriate.
No public hue or cry has erupted over the issue. Yes, two stem cell agency watchdogs have expressed dismay or outrage. One newspaper said Robert Klein should give up his state post if he continues to pursue the lobbying effort. But another good government advocate privately said he did not detect illegal or even unethical conduct.
So what's at stake here? One question centers on whether Klein has something to gain that conflicts or appears to conflict with his role as a state employee. Another question involves whether he is using inappropriately his position as chairman of the CIRM. Would he have been asked to lobby for the land deal if he were not overseeing the agency?
The answer to that question is: Probably not. Klein would be little more than another Darrell Issa if he were not the chair of CIRM's Oversight Committee. “Darrell who?” you might ask. Issa, like Klein, played a major role into a ballot measure that has had an enormous impact on California. In Issa's case, he financed, with $1.7 million of his own money, the effort that placed the gubernatorial recall on the 2003 ballot and sent Arnold Schwarzenegger to the state house. Issa was widely believed to be considering a run for governor. But today he remains an obscure California congressman.
Klein would have lapsed into similar obscurity without his high visibility post at CIRM. He now travels to Australia and Korea to hobnob with international stem cell scientists. He is profiled by Fortune magazine. He is an articulate, aggressive global salesman for human embryonic stem cell research.
But that is almost totally due to his state post. He heads his own private, national stem cell lobbying group in California, but that does not provide the prestige and power that accrues as the result of heading a concern that is giving away money this year at the rate of $29,000 an hour.
Tomorrow(7/12), Klein plans to bring his state-endowed prestige and power to bear on five Yolo County supervisors, some of whom have greater political ambitions and need to raise funds. Failure to act favorably on the 2,800-acre land use change could dry up some potential sources of funding, some of whom may well have ties to Klein, who is a prodigious fundraiser. Those considerations will certainly be going through the minds of supervisors as they hear him speak.
A spokeswoman says that Klein will not benefit financially from the deal that would make farmland along Interstate 80 between Sacramento and UC Davis available for development. In return, Yolo County, one of the top tomato producers in the nation, would be home to a stem cell research center with a $300 million or so endowment. Klein would chair the new institute. The Sacramento Bee reported that Klein is “cagey” about whether he would hold his state position at the same time. However, the proposed nonprofit would certainly look to CIRM for funding of at least some of its activities. Even if Klein has left CIRM by the time those grants are sought, he will still enjoy considerable, residual clout as the result of his CIRM connections. The situation is akin to those Pentagon officials who leave the government and go to work for enterprises seeking lucrative Defense Department contracts.
Klein is a multimillionaire real estate investment banker, who continues to operate his own business. He and Angelo Tsakopolous, the Sacramento developer and major political contributor seeking the land use change, go back a few years, but Klein's aides say they have never done business together. Klein's association with Tsakopolous has already proved beneficial. The developer's firm, AKT, gave $125,000 to Klein's lobbying group, Americans for Stem Cell Therapies and Cures, last April. If the Yolo deal is successful, it could lead to joint real estate work in the future. Tsakopoulos is a firm believer in building good relationships.
From Klein's point of view, he believes more research is better. To fail to bend his best efforts to promote the field and develop more resources would be to short change a campaign he has already devoted years to. Should he remain aloof from an ambitious project because of the tender sensitivities of some? No, he would answer. That's not the way to bring cures to millions of suffering people.
In stem cell circles, scientists talk of the “yuck factor” and chimeras, the mythological beasts composed of more than one animal. Some say that if a stem cell experiment creates such a creature and generates a “yuck” response, the experiment should be dropped.
Klein, who is a man of many parts, generates a “yuck” for his Yolo lobbying, his harshest critics say. We do not entirely disagree. His multiple roles raise questions about his primary priority. Serving as chairman of CIRM was perceived under Prop. 71 as a fulltime position complete with a $412,500 salary (which Klein to his credit does not take). Klein wrote substantial portions of that law. It is now time for him to respect its intent.
(Correction: An earlier version of this said CIRM was scheduled to approve grants at a rate of $54,000 an hour this year.)
No public hue or cry has erupted over the issue. Yes, two stem cell agency watchdogs have expressed dismay or outrage. One newspaper said Robert Klein should give up his state post if he continues to pursue the lobbying effort. But another good government advocate privately said he did not detect illegal or even unethical conduct.
So what's at stake here? One question centers on whether Klein has something to gain that conflicts or appears to conflict with his role as a state employee. Another question involves whether he is using inappropriately his position as chairman of the CIRM. Would he have been asked to lobby for the land deal if he were not overseeing the agency?
The answer to that question is: Probably not. Klein would be little more than another Darrell Issa if he were not the chair of CIRM's Oversight Committee. “Darrell who?” you might ask. Issa, like Klein, played a major role into a ballot measure that has had an enormous impact on California. In Issa's case, he financed, with $1.7 million of his own money, the effort that placed the gubernatorial recall on the 2003 ballot and sent Arnold Schwarzenegger to the state house. Issa was widely believed to be considering a run for governor. But today he remains an obscure California congressman.
Klein would have lapsed into similar obscurity without his high visibility post at CIRM. He now travels to Australia and Korea to hobnob with international stem cell scientists. He is profiled by Fortune magazine. He is an articulate, aggressive global salesman for human embryonic stem cell research.
But that is almost totally due to his state post. He heads his own private, national stem cell lobbying group in California, but that does not provide the prestige and power that accrues as the result of heading a concern that is giving away money this year at the rate of $29,000 an hour.
Tomorrow(7/12), Klein plans to bring his state-endowed prestige and power to bear on five Yolo County supervisors, some of whom have greater political ambitions and need to raise funds. Failure to act favorably on the 2,800-acre land use change could dry up some potential sources of funding, some of whom may well have ties to Klein, who is a prodigious fundraiser. Those considerations will certainly be going through the minds of supervisors as they hear him speak.
A spokeswoman says that Klein will not benefit financially from the deal that would make farmland along Interstate 80 between Sacramento and UC Davis available for development. In return, Yolo County, one of the top tomato producers in the nation, would be home to a stem cell research center with a $300 million or so endowment. Klein would chair the new institute. The Sacramento Bee reported that Klein is “cagey” about whether he would hold his state position at the same time. However, the proposed nonprofit would certainly look to CIRM for funding of at least some of its activities. Even if Klein has left CIRM by the time those grants are sought, he will still enjoy considerable, residual clout as the result of his CIRM connections. The situation is akin to those Pentagon officials who leave the government and go to work for enterprises seeking lucrative Defense Department contracts.
Klein is a multimillionaire real estate investment banker, who continues to operate his own business. He and Angelo Tsakopolous, the Sacramento developer and major political contributor seeking the land use change, go back a few years, but Klein's aides say they have never done business together. Klein's association with Tsakopolous has already proved beneficial. The developer's firm, AKT, gave $125,000 to Klein's lobbying group, Americans for Stem Cell Therapies and Cures, last April. If the Yolo deal is successful, it could lead to joint real estate work in the future. Tsakopoulos is a firm believer in building good relationships.
From Klein's point of view, he believes more research is better. To fail to bend his best efforts to promote the field and develop more resources would be to short change a campaign he has already devoted years to. Should he remain aloof from an ambitious project because of the tender sensitivities of some? No, he would answer. That's not the way to bring cures to millions of suffering people.
In stem cell circles, scientists talk of the “yuck factor” and chimeras, the mythological beasts composed of more than one animal. Some say that if a stem cell experiment creates such a creature and generates a “yuck” response, the experiment should be dropped.
Klein, who is a man of many parts, generates a “yuck” for his Yolo lobbying, his harshest critics say. We do not entirely disagree. His multiple roles raise questions about his primary priority. Serving as chairman of CIRM was perceived under Prop. 71 as a fulltime position complete with a $412,500 salary (which Klein to his credit does not take). Klein wrote substantial portions of that law. It is now time for him to respect its intent.
(Correction: An earlier version of this said CIRM was scheduled to approve grants at a rate of $54,000 an hour this year.)
Fresh Comment
Christopher Scott, executive director of Stanford's Stem Cells in Society program, has posted a comment on the Thomson item below, raising some interesting questions regarding Thomson's affiliation with UCSB.
Proposed Criteria for Major CIRM Lab Grants
Here is the text of the proposed criteria for the $220 million in lab grants scheduled to be given out later this year. The text was provided by CIRM.
Criteria, Definitions & Scoring
Recommended by the Facilities Working Group for RFA 07-03
Value (Special Features, Innovation/Sustainability
Costs)
Definition:
The investment represents a good return to the
taxpayer while considering costs, quality, geographic
location, and benefits of the project. The facility has
innovative elements that encourage conservation and
renewable resources. The project costs are reasonable
and necessary.
Scoring: 25
Leverage
Definition:
The CIRM investment prompts additional investments
that are consistent with the CIRM objectives; these
investments are additional capital funding for the
project. These costs include project cash expenditures
prior to the Notice of Grant Award and may include
(1) the purchase of land and/or a building at the
documented cost to the institution and (2) other
capitalized project cost. The project leverage
attributable to internal project overhead and
architectural and engineering costs will be no more
than 10% of the total project costs.
Scoring: 25
Urgency
Definition:
Places a high priority on completion of the project
within two years; and the delivery of projects on an
expedited scheduled. The institution, the team and
approach has a historic and proven track record of
delivering capital projects on an expedited schedule.
Start Date: Notice of Grant Award
End Date: The base building is available for
occupancy and/or installation of equipment.
Scoring: 20
Shared Resources
Definition:
The project benefits from facility assets at the
applicant site or collaborating institutions that reduce
the cost and increase the value for the mission.
Scoring: 15
Functionality
Definition:
The planned space design for the base building and
tenant improvements is consistent with the CIRM
objectives of meeting current programmatic needs and
expanding regenerative medicine research capacity
and capabilities. The facility provides for long term
flexibility while meeting scientific objectives.
Scoring: 15
Adopted on July 12, 2007
Criteria, Definitions & Scoring
Recommended by the Facilities Working Group for RFA 07-03
Value (Special Features, Innovation/Sustainability
Costs)
Definition:
The investment represents a good return to the
taxpayer while considering costs, quality, geographic
location, and benefits of the project. The facility has
innovative elements that encourage conservation and
renewable resources. The project costs are reasonable
and necessary.
Scoring: 25
Leverage
Definition:
The CIRM investment prompts additional investments
that are consistent with the CIRM objectives; these
investments are additional capital funding for the
project. These costs include project cash expenditures
prior to the Notice of Grant Award and may include
(1) the purchase of land and/or a building at the
documented cost to the institution and (2) other
capitalized project cost. The project leverage
attributable to internal project overhead and
architectural and engineering costs will be no more
than 10% of the total project costs.
Scoring: 25
Urgency
Definition:
Places a high priority on completion of the project
within two years; and the delivery of projects on an
expedited scheduled. The institution, the team and
approach has a historic and proven track record of
delivering capital projects on an expedited schedule.
Start Date: Notice of Grant Award
End Date: The base building is available for
occupancy and/or installation of equipment.
Scoring: 20
Shared Resources
Definition:
The project benefits from facility assets at the
applicant site or collaborating institutions that reduce
the cost and increase the value for the mission.
Scoring: 15
Functionality
Definition:
The planned space design for the base building and
tenant improvements is consistent with the CIRM
objectives of meeting current programmatic needs and
expanding regenerative medicine research capacity
and capabilities. The facility provides for long term
flexibility while meeting scientific objectives.
Scoring: 15
Adopted on July 12, 2007
Sunday, July 15, 2007
Thomson's New Lab Under Construction In Santa Barbara
Ever so quietly, eminent stem cell researcher Jamie Thomson is coming to California – at least part-time.
The move has attracted little public notice. The news has oozed out, much as tar seeps onto the sandy beaches of Santa Barbara, where Thomson's new lab is under construction on a bluff overlooking the Pacific Ocean.
His appointment as an unpaid adjunct professor at the University of California campus there has definitely produced something less than big headlines.
But Thomson's impending presence did play an indirect role in helping to secure a $2.3 million grant for the campus from the California stem cell agency.
The CIRM review of the UCSB grant repeatedly referred to Thomson, who works fulltime at the University of Wisconsin, without naming him. It noted that UCSB, which has five Nobel Laureates, came up with $1 million to establish Thomson's lab. The review said “that the close proximity of the recently-recruited PI will keep the effort (meaning management of CIRM-funded research) state-of-the-art.”
The review continued:
The only California story we have seen on Thomson's appointment is a five-paragraph article by Nick Welsh in the Independent, a free weekly newspaper in Santa Barbara. Welsh quoted Dale Carlson, chief communications officer for CIRM, as saying:
The move has attracted little public notice. The news has oozed out, much as tar seeps onto the sandy beaches of Santa Barbara, where Thomson's new lab is under construction on a bluff overlooking the Pacific Ocean.
His appointment as an unpaid adjunct professor at the University of California campus there has definitely produced something less than big headlines.
But Thomson's impending presence did play an indirect role in helping to secure a $2.3 million grant for the campus from the California stem cell agency.
The CIRM review of the UCSB grant repeatedly referred to Thomson, who works fulltime at the University of Wisconsin, without naming him. It noted that UCSB, which has five Nobel Laureates, came up with $1 million to establish Thomson's lab. The review said “that the close proximity of the recently-recruited PI will keep the effort (meaning management of CIRM-funded research) state-of-the-art.”
The review continued:
“There was continued discussion on the nature of the interactions with the newly-recruited PI (Thomson). The letter from this PI describes the establishment of a satellite lab at the home institution and four collaborations, three of which have been initiated (including one with the PD), and one of which is to be initiated. This new PI offers experience in growing cells in serum-free, feeder-free conditions. How this PI will work out the situation with a satellite lab is unclear, but s/he suggests that 5-8 people will be working on-site at the applicant institution. It was noted that this PI will provide advice and consultation but there was no percent effort commitment nor any indication of how much time s/he would spend at the institution.”We should note that the grant was not for Thomson's work.
The only California story we have seen on Thomson's appointment is a five-paragraph article by Nick Welsh in the Independent, a free weekly newspaper in Santa Barbara. Welsh quoted Dale Carlson, chief communications officer for CIRM, as saying:
"This is a great coup for Santa Barbara. He is one of the finest, if not the very finest, researcher in the field."
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Correction
The “Lab Criteria” item below did not include the name of Janet Wright as one of the CIRM Oversight Committee members attending the Facilities Group meeting.
Scientists and Their PR Responsibilities
Good advice on the role of scientists in the ongoing debate about embryonic stem cell research can be found on Nature's new blog on stem cell issues.
Monya Baker, San Francisco news editor for the magazine, commented on the recent testimony that the Bush administration squashed dissenting view among its appointees, which we should note happens with almost any powerful presidential administration, or for that matter, gubernatorial(see stories about how Arnold appears to be micromanaging the state's smog board).
Baker said it was important for scientists to be publicly engaged lest Luddites carry the day. She wrote:
Monya Baker, San Francisco news editor for the magazine, commented on the recent testimony that the Bush administration squashed dissenting view among its appointees, which we should note happens with almost any powerful presidential administration, or for that matter, gubernatorial(see stories about how Arnold appears to be micromanaging the state's smog board).
Baker said it was important for scientists to be publicly engaged lest Luddites carry the day. She wrote:
"To be part of the solution, scientists must spend time away from the lab bench. The scientific community should get its views (and the evidence for them) into the public sphere, writing letters to editors and politicians, speaking to schools and gatherings.We add that it takes repetition, repetition and more repetition to have an impact.
"When scientists do so, they balance enthusiasm with caution, caveats with imagination. They should be able to tell personal anecdotes without fear of being mocked by their peers. To maintain credibility, not to mention civility, scientists should understand opposition to stem-cell research and describe which opinions are backed by data, which are not, and which exist independent of data.
"Consistent efforts can help turn a raucous debate into a reasoned one."
CIRM Panel Sets Lab Criteria, Nitty Gritty Still Pending
Much work remains to be done on the details for the criteria for $220 million in stem cell research lab grants to California universities and research institutions, but “great progress” was achieved earlier this week, according to one long longtime observer.
John M. Simpson, stem cell project director for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, said the lengthy session “accomplished a lot.” He wrote in an email that the
"CIRM staff needs to fill in major details with draft language now that broad policy objectives have been set. It was a long meeting, but a necessary one if the public is to have faith in the mechanism of doling out $220 million in building grants."
Simpson, who was a newspaper editor for many years prior to his current position, offered this account of this week's events.
The Facilities Working Group during a marathon seven-hour meeting Thursday unanimously decided to require that the 20 percent matching requirement necessary under Prop. 71 to receive a facilities grant be made in cash.
The eight FWG members present also agreed to refer to amounts contributed to a project beyond the 20 percent threshold as "leverage."
The panel selected five criteria to use in making the awards and the points
that would be awarded to each of the criteria. Assuming that an applicant
could receive 100 points, the criteria and and possible value are:
--Urgency (20 points)
--Value (25 points)
-- Leverage (25 points)
--Functionality (15 points)
-- Shared resources (15 points)
The members considered the possibility of using a scale with more total
points as long as the ratio among the criteria remained the same and
suggested CIRM staff give that further thought.
All agreed that if CIRM is to maximize its impact on stem cell research
facilities across California, it will be necessary to encourage institutions
to bring as much "leverage", that is cash, to building projects as possible.
"We'll have to get substantial cash leverage," said Bob Klein, ICOC
chairman.
All of the procedures and criteria developed by the FWG for the proposed
$220 million in facilities grants must be approved by the ICOC.
The FWG also voted to recommend that grant recipients be required to use
buildings financed with CIRM money for regenerative medicine for a definite
period of time, perhaps 10 or 20 years. They decided to leave the exact time
requirement to be determined by the ICOC.
The panel also developed definitions for each of the criteria. The next step
is for the CIRM staff to propose draft language for standards to evaluate
each of the criteria. The proposals will be discussed at a meeting of
"interested parties" (representatives of institutions likely to seek money)
on July 25.
The FWG will is expected to meet July 30 to complete its recommendations so
they can be forwarded to the ICOC for its August meeting.
Arlene Chiu, acting chief scientific officer, outlined a proposal to consider a two-step process to review the facilities grants. They would be reviewed first by the Scientific Working Group for scientific merit and then be forwarded to the ICOC. After ICOC review, the proposals would go to the
Facilities Working Group for review and recommendation to the ICOC.
The FWG did not act on that proposal because by that point in the meeting it
was short of a quorum, Joan Samuelson and Stuart Laff, having departed around 6 pm. The consensus appeared to be that the staff recommendation made sense.
Other committee members attending were: David Lichtenger, chairman; Klein; Edward Kashian; David Serano Sewell; Janet Wright and Jeff Sheehy. Around 20 people, mostly representatives of institution seeking money, attended.
(Editor's note: An earlier version of this item did not include Janet Wright as one of the committee members attending the Facilities Group meeing.)
John M. Simpson, stem cell project director for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, said the lengthy session “accomplished a lot.” He wrote in an email that the
"CIRM staff needs to fill in major details with draft language now that broad policy objectives have been set. It was a long meeting, but a necessary one if the public is to have faith in the mechanism of doling out $220 million in building grants."
Simpson, who was a newspaper editor for many years prior to his current position, offered this account of this week's events.
The Facilities Working Group during a marathon seven-hour meeting Thursday unanimously decided to require that the 20 percent matching requirement necessary under Prop. 71 to receive a facilities grant be made in cash.
The eight FWG members present also agreed to refer to amounts contributed to a project beyond the 20 percent threshold as "leverage."
The panel selected five criteria to use in making the awards and the points
that would be awarded to each of the criteria. Assuming that an applicant
could receive 100 points, the criteria and and possible value are:
--Urgency (20 points)
--Value (25 points)
-- Leverage (25 points)
--Functionality (15 points)
-- Shared resources (15 points)
The members considered the possibility of using a scale with more total
points as long as the ratio among the criteria remained the same and
suggested CIRM staff give that further thought.
All agreed that if CIRM is to maximize its impact on stem cell research
facilities across California, it will be necessary to encourage institutions
to bring as much "leverage", that is cash, to building projects as possible.
"We'll have to get substantial cash leverage," said Bob Klein, ICOC
chairman.
All of the procedures and criteria developed by the FWG for the proposed
$220 million in facilities grants must be approved by the ICOC.
The FWG also voted to recommend that grant recipients be required to use
buildings financed with CIRM money for regenerative medicine for a definite
period of time, perhaps 10 or 20 years. They decided to leave the exact time
requirement to be determined by the ICOC.
The panel also developed definitions for each of the criteria. The next step
is for the CIRM staff to propose draft language for standards to evaluate
each of the criteria. The proposals will be discussed at a meeting of
"interested parties" (representatives of institutions likely to seek money)
on July 25.
The FWG will is expected to meet July 30 to complete its recommendations so
they can be forwarded to the ICOC for its August meeting.
Arlene Chiu, acting chief scientific officer, outlined a proposal to consider a two-step process to review the facilities grants. They would be reviewed first by the Scientific Working Group for scientific merit and then be forwarded to the ICOC. After ICOC review, the proposals would go to the
Facilities Working Group for review and recommendation to the ICOC.
The FWG did not act on that proposal because by that point in the meeting it
was short of a quorum, Joan Samuelson and Stuart Laff, having departed around 6 pm. The consensus appeared to be that the staff recommendation made sense.
Other committee members attending were: David Lichtenger, chairman; Klein; Edward Kashian; David Serano Sewell; Janet Wright and Jeff Sheehy. Around 20 people, mostly representatives of institution seeking money, attended.
(Editor's note: An earlier version of this item did not include Janet Wright as one of the committee members attending the Facilities Group meeing.)
The Bee Calls for Klein Resignation If He Continues to Lobby on Land Deal
The Sacramento Bee said today that California stem cell Chairman Robert Klein should resign from his post at the $3 billion state institute if he continues to lobby on behalf of a controversial Northern California deal that would swap favorable land use decisions for a private stem cell research facility.
The editorial noted that Klein's stem lobbying group, Americans for Stem Cell Therapies and Cures, earlier this spring received $125,000 from the Angelo Tsakopolous' land development company, which is seeking to convert farmland to commercial development. In return, a $200 millon stem cell nonprofit institute would be created at the location. The more than 2,000 acres is located on Interstate 80 between Sacramento and UC Davis.
The Bee wrote in an editorial:
The editorial noted that Klein's stem lobbying group, Americans for Stem Cell Therapies and Cures, earlier this spring received $125,000 from the Angelo Tsakopolous' land development company, which is seeking to convert farmland to commercial development. In return, a $200 millon stem cell nonprofit institute would be created at the location. The more than 2,000 acres is located on Interstate 80 between Sacramento and UC Davis.
The Bee wrote in an editorial:
"Klein says there's no connection between his efforts to retire campaign debt (owed by his lobbying group) and his support for the Yolo project, but it nonetheless creates an appearance of paycheck politics. If Klein wants to continue to promote the Yolo project or any project that could overlap with his duties as a state official, he needs to resign from CIRM. The sooner the better."The newspaper said that Klein makes a "compelling case" for the type of research facility that would be built at the site by a nonprofit institute that would be headed by Klein. The Bee wrote,
"But if the case is strong, the multiple hats that Klein is wearing with this project are troublesome....He is cagey when asked if he would also continue to chair CIRM. There's the potential that the industries and researchers who would be part of this Yolo research center would also seek funding from the California institute, which would put Klein in a serious conflict of interest."
Friday, July 13, 2007
Fresh Comment
Jesse Reynolds of the Center for Genetics and Society makes an interesting point in a comment on the Lansing item below. He notes that Jeff Sheehy, who serves as a patient advocate and is on the Facilities Group, is employed by UC San Francisco.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Sherry Lansing Resigns from Lab Grant Group; Conflicts of Interest Cited
University of California Regent Sherry Lansing today resigned from the group that is setting criteria for the California stem cell agency's $220 million lab grant program.
California stem cell Chairman Robert Klein announced Lansing's resignation at the beginning of the meeting of the Facilities Working Group.
He said Lansing, who is in Portugal, was leaving the group because she "wants things to go forward and because she sees possible conflicts with her role as a UC regent and the working group's work," according to John M. Simpson, of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumers Rights.
Simpson is attending the meeting in the San Francisco area this afternoon.
A number of UC campuses are expected to seek building funds under the program. The facilities group makes funding criteria recommendations to the full Oversight Committee, on which Lansing also has a seat.
That committee will make the final decision on the rules for receiving the grants. Many of its members are employed by or have links to institutions that are likely to apply for funds.
With the resignation of Lansing, none of those institutions have seats on the 10-member facilities group. The only members of the Oversight Committee now on the panel are five patient advocates. The other members come from the private sector or, in one case, the state Department of Corrections.
More On the Presidential Search, Plus Lab Grants and ICOC Vacancies
John M. Simpson, stem cell project director of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumers Rights, offered the following observations on today's CIRM events, including this afternoon's meeting on the criteria for $220 million in lab construction grants and vacancies on the Oversight Committee.
Simpson, who has followed the agency closely for about two years, was present for this morning's meeting of the Oversight Committee concerning its attempts to find a new president. Simpson said in an email:
Simpson continued:
Concerning the vacancies on the board, Simpson said,
Simpson, who has followed the agency closely for about two years, was present for this morning's meeting of the Oversight Committee concerning its attempts to find a new president. Simpson said in an email:
"'Steady progress' is being made toward selecting a president and chief executive of CIRM, Robert Klein, ICOC chairman, said this morning after an early morning executive session of the board. He declined, however,...to be specific about a time table to complete the selection. He said selecting the right candidate was the most important issue, not the schedule."Simpson said board went into executive session about 7:15 a.m. Klein predicted a 15 to 30 minute meeting.
Simpson continued:
"The board resumed public session at approximately 8:15 am with Klein commenting that he should have offered a more realistic prediction of the length of the meeting given the board's proclivity for full discussion ofSimpson said that he complained to the Oversight Committee about the failure of the Facilities Working Group to post background documents on the lab grant criteria well in advance of this afternoon's critical meeting. Simpson said the documents were vital to understanding the largest grant package CIRM has offered so far. He said he wanted to the full board to be aware of the situation.
issues.
"'There were a lot of thoughtful comments,' Klein said."
Concerning the vacancies on the board, Simpson said,
"After the meeting in conversation with Tamar Pachter, General Counsel, and James Harrison, outside counsel, it emerged that both David Baltimore, former president of Caltech and Richard Murphy, former president of the Salk Institute, have resigned from the board. They had their ICOC positions by virtue of their jobs before recently retiring.The CIRM quorum requirement is large and is written into state law by Prop. 71. It cannot be changed by the Oversight Committee, only by an unlikely revision in the law. In contrast, other government entities often need only a simple majority of their members to take legal action. Large quorum requirements mean that a minority on a board can block action simply by not being present at a meeting.
"With the vacancy created by the death ofLeon Thal, the ICOC has 26 members instead of the full compliment of 29. This means that a quorum -- something the board frequently has had difficulty mustering -- is now 17 members rather than 18."
CIRM Directors Still Looking for New President
Directors of the California stem cell agency this morning met again behind closed doors to discuss candidates to head the $3 billion research effort but adjourned without announcing a decision.
The search is now into its seven month. CIRM's first president, Zach Hall, announced his plans to leave early last December. The agency has been without a permanent president since the beginning of May, when Hall departed.
The Oversight Committee could have acted this morning. The matter of presidential compensation and candidates was properly noticed on its agenda. But virtually the entire teleconference meeting, which included a link to one director in Portugal, was in executive session, and no announcements were made during the public segment.
John M. Simpson, stem cell project director for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, asked during the public portion whether a new president would be named prior to the directors meeting in August.
Chair Robert Klein replied that artificial timelines could not be imposed and and that the search must focus on finding a president with the right scientific vision for the agency, according to CIRM officials. Previously the Oversight Committee had expected to fill the position in June.
Klein may call another presidential meeting within the next 10 or 15 days.
The search is now into its seven month. CIRM's first president, Zach Hall, announced his plans to leave early last December. The agency has been without a permanent president since the beginning of May, when Hall departed.
The Oversight Committee could have acted this morning. The matter of presidential compensation and candidates was properly noticed on its agenda. But virtually the entire teleconference meeting, which included a link to one director in Portugal, was in executive session, and no announcements were made during the public segment.
John M. Simpson, stem cell project director for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, asked during the public portion whether a new president would be named prior to the directors meeting in August.
Chair Robert Klein replied that artificial timelines could not be imposed and and that the search must focus on finding a president with the right scientific vision for the agency, according to CIRM officials. Previously the Oversight Committee had expected to fill the position in June.
Klein may call another presidential meeting within the next 10 or 15 days.
Stem Cell Snippets: Pachter, Kessler and Google
CIRM General Counsel – Jessica Jones has a brief Q&A on law.com with CIRM's new general counsel, Tamar Pachter. Among other things, Pachter was asked what is like working for a controversial agency. Her reply, "Is there a state agency that isn't controversial (laughs). It really doesn't affect my work all that much."
Egg Concerns – Anna Salleh for ABC Online reports concern in Australia about international trafficking in human eggs for stem cell research. Catherine Waldby of the University of Sydney is quoted as saying there are already problems in eastern Europe. Waldby's research is to be published in the New Genetics and Society Journal.
Kessler and Google Health Committee – CIRM Oversight Committee member David Kessler has been named to Google's Health Advisory Council. Kessler is also dean of the UC San Francisco medical school. The Google council is aimed at understanding health issues and providing "feedback on product ideas and development." Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google, contributed at least $100,000 to the Prop.71 campaign.
Egg Concerns – Anna Salleh for ABC Online reports concern in Australia about international trafficking in human eggs for stem cell research. Catherine Waldby of the University of Sydney is quoted as saying there are already problems in eastern Europe. Waldby's research is to be published in the New Genetics and Society Journal.
Kessler and Google Health Committee – CIRM Oversight Committee member David Kessler has been named to Google's Health Advisory Council. Kessler is also dean of the UC San Francisco medical school. The Google council is aimed at understanding health issues and providing "feedback on product ideas and development." Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google, contributed at least $100,000 to the Prop.71 campaign.
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Poultry and CIRM's Oversight Committee
The California stem cell agency has two lame ducks on its board and another vacancy that has remained unfilled as the result of gubernatorial inaction since last February.
The vacancy on the Oversight Committee is the seat formerly held by Leon Thal, who died in a plane crash on Feb. 3.
Thal was appointed to the board by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. State law requires him to fill the vacancy within 30 days. We asked the governor's office today when the post would be filled. Sabrina Lockhart, a spokeswoman, replied:
"Gov. Schwarzenegger is proud of California's leadership in stem cell research - which has placed our state on the cutting-edge of this potentially life-saving science. Because stem cell research is such an important priority for the Governor, he will fill the vacancy as soon as he finds an ideal candidate to fill the position."
It is not uncommon for governors to flout deadlines such as the one created by Prop. 71 for filling vacancies.
The lame ducks on the board are David Baltimore, former president of Caltech, and Richard Murphy, who retired earlier this month from his position as head of the Salk Institute.
Both hold their seats on the 29-member Oversight Committee as the result of their former professional positions. Both are expected to continue to serve at least for some time, which appears to be permissible under Prop. 71.
The vacancy on the Oversight Committee is the seat formerly held by Leon Thal, who died in a plane crash on Feb. 3.
Thal was appointed to the board by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. State law requires him to fill the vacancy within 30 days. We asked the governor's office today when the post would be filled. Sabrina Lockhart, a spokeswoman, replied:
"Gov. Schwarzenegger is proud of California's leadership in stem cell research - which has placed our state on the cutting-edge of this potentially life-saving science. Because stem cell research is such an important priority for the Governor, he will fill the vacancy as soon as he finds an ideal candidate to fill the position."
It is not uncommon for governors to flout deadlines such as the one created by Prop. 71 for filling vacancies.
The lame ducks on the board are David Baltimore, former president of Caltech, and Richard Murphy, who retired earlier this month from his position as head of the Salk Institute.
Both hold their seats on the 29-member Oversight Committee as the result of their former professional positions. Both are expected to continue to serve at least for some time, which appears to be permissible under Prop. 71.
More Fresh Comments
Anonymous weighs in with more on the "cronyism" business related to the "90 Percent" item below. We have posted an answer to the question of why only 27 biographical sketches are found on the CIRM website for the 29-member Oversight Committee.
Fresh Comments
An anonymous comment has been posted on the "90 percent" item below, which raises a question about the significance of the item. We have posted a reply. "Faye" also had a comment about the terms of Oversight Committee members and whether they can be rotated out. We have posted additional information in response to her query. You can find all of this by going to the "90 percent" item and looking at comments at the end of the item.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
New Lab Proposal Info Now Available
The California stem cell agency this afternoon posted 58 Power Point slides for the meeting of the Facilities Working Group Thursday afternoon. The slides summarize comments made at four earlier hearings, identify some questions that should be answered at this week's session and outline steps to be taken before the proposal is presented to the Oversight Committee Aug. 8 in San Francisco for approval.
While obviously sketchy, they are useful -- in fact mandatory reading -- for anyone interested in the subject of giving away $220 million for construction of new stem cell research labs in California.
While obviously sketchy, they are useful -- in fact mandatory reading -- for anyone interested in the subject of giving away $220 million for construction of new stem cell research labs in California.
Monday, July 09, 2007
Five-hour Research Lab Meeting: A Mockery?
The California stem cell agency Thursday afternoon is going to attempt to set criteria in five hours for handing out $220 million in research lab grants in a process that one watchdog likens to a "public relations sham."
No proposed criteria will be available prior to the public meeting. They may not be available at the beginning of the meeting either. Instead, the only advance, online offerings are likely to be marginally useful, Power Point presentations that will summarize issues and suggestions presented during previous four public sessions of the Facilities Working Group.
John M. Simpson, stem cell project director for the Foundation of Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, Monday said in an email to California stem cell Chairman Robert Klein,
The only documents available online until late Monday afternoon were two facilities group transcripts from May 31 and June 4. Transcripts from hearings June 11 and June 19 were not available until Simpson called -- in his email to Klein -- for them to be posted forthwith.
The failure to post important material well in advance harkens back to earlier days of CIRM, when even members of its Oversight Committee complained publicly about not getting background material in advance. Some of that can be chalked up to growing pains.
But problem is obviously continuing. It has been compounded by not allowing enough time at meetings -- called by Klein or other committee chairs -- to cover all the necessary ground. In this case, for example, 11 persons sit on the Facilities Working Group. If each took only 10 minutes asking questions or making comments, that would consume nearly two hours. Then there is a staff presentation, questions and comments from representatives of California universities and institutions as well as from the general public. All with no draft criteria to actually read and study ahead of time.
Encumbering the process of handing out research lab grants fits with what one might call a modified stonewall strategy. CIRM does not have to make grants for lab construction. If it did not, CIRM would would have more money for research, which seems to be a priority of patient advocates on the Oversight Committee. On the other hand, executives from institutions represented on the committee could understandably take a different view although grants for their researchers are certainly important to them.
Whatever the case, the facilities group's hearings on the research lab criteria have been one of CIRM's more heavily attended series of events – mainly by folks from universities and nonprofit institutions.
It is a disservice to them, the public and CIRM itself not to provide a better opportunity for comment as well as thoughtful consideration by the working group.
No proposed criteria will be available prior to the public meeting. They may not be available at the beginning of the meeting either. Instead, the only advance, online offerings are likely to be marginally useful, Power Point presentations that will summarize issues and suggestions presented during previous four public sessions of the Facilities Working Group.
John M. Simpson, stem cell project director for the Foundation of Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, Monday said in an email to California stem cell Chairman Robert Klein,
"This facilities RFA is one of the most important and potentially contentious RFAs that CIRM will issue. It's supposed to be based on the input of four public hearings held around the state.Simpson added that not having the information in advance also makes it difficult for members of the working group to take intelligent action.
"The ICOC is to be commended for authorizing those hearings to gather public input about the policies.
"However, not making a draft of the policies to be discussed available with ample time for review by the public so they can make intelligent comments at the meeting makes a mockery of the entire process. It forces one to conclude that there was no real interest in meaningful public input and that your process was nothing more than a public relations sham."
The only documents available online until late Monday afternoon were two facilities group transcripts from May 31 and June 4. Transcripts from hearings June 11 and June 19 were not available until Simpson called -- in his email to Klein -- for them to be posted forthwith.
The failure to post important material well in advance harkens back to earlier days of CIRM, when even members of its Oversight Committee complained publicly about not getting background material in advance. Some of that can be chalked up to growing pains.
But problem is obviously continuing. It has been compounded by not allowing enough time at meetings -- called by Klein or other committee chairs -- to cover all the necessary ground. In this case, for example, 11 persons sit on the Facilities Working Group. If each took only 10 minutes asking questions or making comments, that would consume nearly two hours. Then there is a staff presentation, questions and comments from representatives of California universities and institutions as well as from the general public. All with no draft criteria to actually read and study ahead of time.
Encumbering the process of handing out research lab grants fits with what one might call a modified stonewall strategy. CIRM does not have to make grants for lab construction. If it did not, CIRM would would have more money for research, which seems to be a priority of patient advocates on the Oversight Committee. On the other hand, executives from institutions represented on the committee could understandably take a different view although grants for their researchers are certainly important to them.
Whatever the case, the facilities group's hearings on the research lab criteria have been one of CIRM's more heavily attended series of events – mainly by folks from universities and nonprofit institutions.
It is a disservice to them, the public and CIRM itself not to provide a better opportunity for comment as well as thoughtful consideration by the working group.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)