It appears that the cartel of university officials has succeeded in gaining a preferred and somewhat closed access to NSF funding.
MESSAGE TO HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Section 3(e) of the National Science Foundation (NSF) Act of 1950, as amended, states that: "...it shall be an objective of the Foundation to strengthen research and education in the sciences and engineering, including independent research by individuals, throughout the United States, and to avoid undue concentration of such research and education."
I took my great technology to UCLA. Our proposal (my technology) was declined:
CBET 0438436MICROSCALE HEAT TRANSFER IN FLUIDS AT SUPERCRITICAL PRESSURES: EXPERIMENTS AND MATHEMATICAL MODELING
U of Cal Los Angeles
Declined 08/19/2004
Without my knowledge, UCLA then submitted Proposal Number 0553571 which was a modification of the above declined proposal, but which still had my great technology as its keystone. UCLA won $399,740. I was surprised to find this out when I scanned active awards at NSF.This certainly amazed me.
I asked NSF's OIG to look into this and recently I was told, “We opened a file in response to your email received in this office on April 17, 2008. We have determined that there is insufficient substance to an allegation of misconduct to proceed in this case. The case has been closed and no further action will be taken.”
I want the Committee on Science and Technology to investigate this situation.It appears that NSF avoids funding independent research by individuals. It appears that NSF resents such applications for funding. It appears that the cartel of university officials has succeeded in gaining a preferred and somewhat closed access to NSF funding.
I received no reply from the House Committee on Science and Technology, So I asked my Congressman, Mike Simpson, to get after these birds. He has done so, and I suppose that at some point I will get some kind of response. Anyway, here is an early response from Mike.
After a while Congressman Simpson wrote me that NSF responded:
Below is the letter from the Inspector General of NSF to Congressman Simpson:
So, in response, I have recently sent the following to Congressman Mike Simpson with copies to NSF and UCLA:Robert H. Leyse
222 Elkhorn Road
Sun Valley, ID 83353
October 18, 2998
Congressman Mike Simpson
U. S. House of Representatives
1339 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Mike:
Thank you for contacting NSF on my behalf. I have your letter of October 6, 2008, that included NSF’s response from its Inspector General.
She bottom lined, “I remain of the opinion that further investigation is unwarranted.”
Well Mike, a lot of further investigation of NSF by Congress is fully warranted. The NSF is effectively run by a cartel of university administrators.
The NSF statement that UCLA’s revised proposal did not include research proposed in the first proposal is false.
NSF sent you a copy of its recent Semiannual Report to Congress. The crimes that are disclosed in that report are trivial in comparison with what NSF and UCLA have done in my case. That report to Congress even refers to ethics. Well, NSF leadership as well as the Dean of Engineering at UCLA ought to be taught about the great American handshake.
Robert H. Leyse
Copy to:
Inspector General
NSF
4201 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22230
Dean of Engineering
UCLA
11000 Kinross Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1406
And I have sent the following to the Inspector General of NSF:
Robert H. Leyse
222 Elkhorn Road
Sun Valley, ID 83353
October 20, 2008
Inspector General
NSF
4201 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22230
Dear Inspector General:
Please audit the following claim by UCLA in its revised NSF PROPOSAL NUMBER 0553571, dated 09/14/2005, and let me know what you find out.
During the past decade we have always employed undergraduate students in our laboratory, giving many students from underrepresented groups the opportunity for hands-on experience in a state-of-the-art research facility. These students have left our laboratory better prepared for graduate level research.
That is, I would like to know how many undergraduate students were employed during each year, by year, from 1995 through 2004, their activities, the time worked, the fraction during each year from underrepresented groups, and the fraction from each year that went on to pursue graduate level research. Also, describe the coordination with UCLA’s Center for Excellence in Engineering and Diversity (CEED), founded during 1993, for each year.
As you may see below, NSF’s rejection of Proposal 0438436 was substantially based on the proposal’s lack of coverage of NSF’s Broad Impacts criteria.
Proposal Number:
0438436
Proposal Title:
MICROSCALE HEAT TRANSFER IN FLUIDS AT SUPERCRITICAL PRESSURES: EXPERIMENTS AND MATHEMATICAL MODELING
Received by NSF:
05/14/04
Principal Investigator:
Gopinath Warrier
Co-PI(s):
Robert Leyse
Vijay Dhir
Performing Organization:
U of Cal Los Angeles
The Program Director concurs with the findings of the Review Panel with respect to the Broad Impacts of the proposed research. This portion of the proposal is deficient. The PIs should refer to the Grant Proposal Guide so that they may properly address these issues. As it is, they have merely restated in one sentence the intellectual merit of the study in the Project Summary. The Project Description does not contain any discussion at all concerning the Broad Impacts criteria.
UCLA responded with claims as follows in its revised Proposal 0553571.
From the PROJECT SUMMARY:
Broader Impact of Proposed Activity
The project will support at least two undergraduate students from underrepresented groups to come and work in the laboratory each summer. This will give the students a chance to gain valuable hands on experience and stimulate their interest in the field of thermal science and engineering. Two Ph.D. students will also be supported as part of this project. The research accomplished will be presented at conferences and published in archival journals for general dissemination to the technical community.
From the body of the Proposal, Page C-13:
BROADER IMPACT
As part of this research project, we intend to support at least two undergraduate students from underrepresented groups to come and work on the project each summer. During the past decade we have always employed undergraduate students in our laboratory, giving many students from underrepresented groups the opportunity for hands-on experience in a state-of-the-art research facility. These students have left our laboratory better prepared for graduate level research. This program will be coordinated with the Center for Excellence in Engineering and Diversity (CEED) within the UCLA School of Engineering and Applied Science. Two Ph.D. students will also be supported – one for the experimental part and another for the mathematical modeling. Results of this study will be presented at conferences and published in archival journal for general dissemination to the technical community.
So, Inspector General, I believe you will agree that UCLA claims that it complies with NSF’s Broad Impacts criteria in its revised proposal 0553571. Certainly, this vital factor must be audited. Again, please let me know what you find out.
Robert H. Leyse
Copy to:
Congressman Mike Simpson
U. S. House of Representatives
1339 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
No comments:
Post a Comment