The California NanoSystems Institute is losing millions from its budget ““ and unfortunately, in the aftermath of this cut, the research facility’s funding model can no longer support most of its valuable outreach programs within the Los Angeles community.
A three-year funding agreement between UCLA and the California NanoSystems Institute expired this summer, meaning that the institute lost $3 million in temporary funds from the university. That money constituted a sizeable chunk of the institute’s budget.
Now, the institute will only receive an $800,000 operating budget from UCLA.
Even though budget reductions may sometimes be unavoidable, a cut of this size raises questions about the funding model that the California NanoSystems Institute now relies on.
After the temporary funding agreement expired, UCLA decided to allow the institute to use grants managed internally for operating funds, which pay for maintenance and staff.
However, the individual grants that go directly to researchers using the Institute’s resources are not up for grabs.
UCLA could allow the institute to require a small percentage of the money from individual research grants to go toward upkeep, overhead and other costs.
After all, it is unfair for the institute to provide the overhead for research yet receive little compensation for hosting the projects. But reductions to the budget don’t just affect internal affairs at the institute, they also harm the wider Los Angeles community.
Apart from the research projects done there, the institute also provides valuable outreach and education programs for local high schools.
With the U.S. already falling behind other countries in STEM fields, the UC can’t afford to cut outreach programs. Activities like high school visits, however, are the first on the chopping block when budgets are reduced. UC research institutes are stumbling down a dangerous path toward becoming solely research laboratories, forgetting their promises to the public.
It’s a disappointing trend ““ when UC research institutes bring real-world science into high school classrooms, the UC better fulfills its public mission.
Though it’s unrealistic to expect the California NanoSystems Institute to be able to put substantial funds toward outreach programs, there are other solutions that could be explored.
Perhaps the institute can work with established student volunteer groups like Building Engineers and Mentors to be their manpower in the city, with research scientists acting as advisers.
The UC should keep in mind that a research institute’s mission should be multi-faceted, not only including research, but also sharing their resources and achievements with the neighboring community.
By reducing the budget for the California NanoSystems Institute, UCLA is limiting its own progress and forgetting its role as a partner to the public.
Email Patel at
kpatel@media.ucla.edu. Send general comments to
opinion@media.ucla.edu or tweet us @DBOpinion.