I know funding is tight, but the market is saturated and employers can be choosy. I'm curious how big the perceived gap between a foundation grant and a federal grant (e.g., NSF, NIH) is among the various institutions (e.g., R1, R2, SLAC). Is all funding considered a plus, or is a federal grant an absolute must for an R1?
Date: 20 Nov 2015 01:41
Number of posts: 7
RSS: New posts
For hiring purposes? Or tenure?
For tenure, the r1 wants to see fed funding. If you're trying to move, then anything with indirects will look good.
In the end, it's all about the indirects.
OP here. I'm an assistant prof thinking of a lateral move. I have foundation funding (PI and Co-I) but no federal funding. Not sure if I'd get a look from R1s, and if I did, whether or not federal funding is a must for tenure.
All funding is great, especially in the current climate. But…there is a sizeable gap between federal and foundation funding (like a publication in a flagship journal vs in one a notch below)
It all comes down to money. The university makes way more on indirect costs from federal grants than from foundation grants. So administrators like Deans/Provosts would do all they could to keep faculty with federal funding, foundation funding, not so much.
We actually had a faculty in our dept not get tenure a couple years ago even though he had ample foundation funding. A big knock on his tenure case was, specifically, the lack of federal funding. However I should highlight that there were other problems, not just the federal funding thing
Jumper - I am also asst. prof on the market. I am not getting bites from R1s for two reasons: (1) lack of fed funding (I have small foundation grants and a previous NRSA) and (2) publishing in niche journals (decent impact factors, but niche). It's rough, but I think if you are trying to move mid-assistant it is a struggle because they wonder why you haven't been able to secure federal funding yet.
How big are your foundation grants? If you're pulling in large Templeton-esque stuff that can look good…but again, it's about how much indirects you are going to be able to bring with you and how much of your salary and grad stipends you can cover.
On a SC now and we had quite a few asst prfo applicants in our pool. One of our top candidates this cycle is a co-I on several federal grants and was ranked higher than another asst prof who was a PI on multiple foundation grants (their publication records were comparable). Echoing was Anon said above, it comes down to support. Being a co-I on a federal grant can actually be a very large chunk of change (> $500K) if there is a subcontract and comes with the juicy indirects that administrators clamor for. However, for tenure purposes, PI grants count for way more than co-I grants FWIW.