My guess is coincident. I suspect the Consumer Science staff has been working on this grant for a real long time.
Writing grant applications is an art and often it does not happen on a first attempt.
Dr. Bonny Specker, who is the one responsible for getting this contract, holds the endowed Ethel Austin Martin chair in human nutrition. The grant was awarded becasue of her excellent national and international reputation and her grant writing ability and a great deal of very hard work by Dr. Specker and her colleagues.. The funding for the endowed chair which resulted in Dr. Specker moving to South Dakota was given about 15 years ago. Dr. Specker has had numerous major grants before but this is certainly the largest and most prestiigious. She beat out the University of Minnesota for example. This was an extremely competitive award.
Division I provides additional visibility and in my opinion is dong many very good things for SDSU. But at best it only indirectly effects SDSU's ability to obtain federal research funding. The real key is outstanding faculty who have time to do research. The university that recieves the most funding for research is Johns Hopkin's University, Washington University in St. Louis is another institution near the top. They are D III. Still every time one hears of an institution in one setting, it tends to increase respect and recognition in other areas. In this way D I sports can contribute positively to research funding.
All of these things, incresed research, more PhD programs, Division I, the Jackrabbit Guarantee Scholarship program that is bringing in more of the state's top students are mutually beneficial and are all contributing to SDSU's growth in size and respect.
Dr. Bonny Specker, who is the one responsible for getting this contract, holds the endowed Ethel Austin Martin chair in human nutrition. The grant was awarded becasue of her excellent national and international reputation and her grant writing ability and a great deal of very hard work by Dr. Specker and her colleagues.. The funding for the endowed chair which resulted in Dr. Specker moving to South Dakota was given about 15 years ago. Dr. Specker has had numerous major grants before but this is certainly the largest and most prestiigious. She beat out the University of Minnesota for example. This was an extremely competitive award.
Division I provides additional visibility and in my opinion is dong many very good things for SDSU. But at best it only indirectly effects SDSU's ability to obtain federal research funding. The real key is outstanding faculty who have time to do research. The university that recieves the most funding for research is Johns Hopkin's University, Washington University in St. Louis is another institution near the top. They are D III. Still every time one hears of an institution in one setting, it tends to increase respect and recognition in other areas. In this way D I sports can contribute positively to research funding.
All of these things, incresed research, more PhD programs, Division I, the Jackrabbit Guarantee Scholarship program that is bringing in more of the state's top students are mutually beneficial and are all contributing to SDSU's growth in size and respect.
In agreement with this with the understanding that these people have been here for a number of years and things are now continuing to improve with more exposure regarding the shortcomings of a great university.
We are here to add what we can to life, not get what we can from life. -Sir William Osler
We do not see things as they are, we see things as we are.
A proposed cut from the White House threatens a children’s health study that would have awarded a record $13.1 million contract to South Dakota State University.
The university would have led a project to monitor the health of 4,000 to 5,000 women of childbearing age in four counties, but President Bush deleted the program from next year’s budget.
“I hope it’s not absolutely final,” John Ruffolo, an associate dean at SDSU who works with research and sponsor programs, said from Brookings.
Leo Trasande, assistant director, Center for Children's Health and the Environment at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York, said the study will shut down unless Congress intervenes.
SDSU was to provide a rural component to a broader national project and would have been one of seven research centers, along with others in Wisconsin, Utah, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, New York and California.
The school would have monitored environmental effects on children’s health, taking into account physical, chemical, biological and psychological factors.
The school would hire about 30 specialists to do the work. They would have enrolled women in Brookings County in South Dakota and Lincoln, Yellow Medicine and Pipestone counties in Minnesota.
The project was to be more than twice the size of other major grants and contracts SDSU has received, such as a recent $3 million grant for a study of rural sociology, Ruffolo said.
“It’s understandable the president’s office would be scrounging around for ways to cut spending,” Ruffolo said. “This would be on the discretionary side. That’s where they look. This is one that would stick out. If you look at programmatic intent. It was to last 22 years.”
There is hope that the give and take between Congress and the White House could save the program, considering it was approved originally, Ruffolo said.
“Because it got through the system, a lot of people thought it was worthwhile,” he said.
Read more about the story in Wednesday's Argus Leader.
Comment