The financial management of research centers and institutes at U.S. medical schools: findings from six institutions.

PURPOSE: To explore three questions surrounding the financial management of research centers and institutes at U.S. medical schools: How do medical schools allocate institutional funds to centers and institutes? How and by whom are those decisions made? What are the implications of these decision-making models on the future of the academic biomedical research enterprise?

METHOD: Using a qualitative research design, the author and associates interviewed over 150 faculty members and administrators at six medical schools and their parent universities in 2004. Interview data were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using a grounded theory approach. This methodology generated rich descriptions and explanations of the six medical schools, which can produce extrapolations to, but not necessarily generalizable findings to, other institutions and settings.

RESULTS

An examination of four dimensions of financial decision-making-funding timing, process, structure, and culture-produces two essential models of how medical schools approach the financial management of research centers. In the first, a "charity" model, center directors make hat-in-hand appeals directly to the dean, the result of which may depend on individual negotiation skills and personal relationships. In the second, a "planned-giving" model, the process for obtaining and renewing funds is institutionalized, agreed upon, and monitored.

CONCLUSIONS

The ways in which deans, administrators, department chairs, and center directors attend to, decide upon, and carry out financial decisions can influence how people throughout the medical school think about interdisciplinary and collaborative activities marshalled though centers and institutes.