tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3404081487134867878.post4297377166129522643..comments2024-03-14T01:15:16.516-07:00Comments on UCLA Faculty Association: It pays to have a med schoolUCLA Faculty Associationhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16529402073844190540noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3404081487134867878.post-54183180513511144052017-07-13T02:56:42.265-07:002017-07-13T02:56:42.265-07:00Dan your headline is misleading. It grosses to ha...Dan your headline is misleading. It grosses to have a med school. It doesn't net (on federal dollars). (Med school net $$ is from clinical practice not research). see e.g. http://utotherescue.blogspot.fr/2014/08/how-can-public-research-universities.html <br /><br />The result is that in FY2013, the year UCLA announced it had grossed $966 m in R&D expenditures, $177 M of those were "institution funds," coming from the university itself (mostly tuition and state general fund revenue). So 18.3% of UCLA's research expenditures came from the university, to make something close to that size loss on the outside sponsorships. (How close those 2 numbers are is a complicated question I start exploring in the post linked above.)<br />Chris Newfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01078395415386100872noreply@blogger.com