Leading the Way in Life Science Technologies

GEN Exclusives

More »

GEN News Highlights

More »
Jul 5, 2010

Top NIH Grants for 2009

  • The U.S. National Institutes of Health provides grants that support the advancement of basic knowledge about all aspects of living systems. The funding efforts are in line with NIH’s stated mission of “extending healthy life and reducing the burdens of illness and disability.”

    Below you will find two listings. The first shows the top 25 grant-receiving institutions based on the total value of all NIH grants awarded in 2009. The second covers the top principal investigators funded by the NIH.

    Top 25 NIH-Funded Institutes*

    Johns Hopkins University—$721,116,047
    University of Michigan at Ann Arbor—$561,836,894
    University of Pennsylvania— $551,850,640
    University of California at San Francisco—$549,486,647
    University of Washington—$525,688,239
    University of Pittsburgh at Pittsburgh—$500,700,083
    University of California at Los Angeles—$463,135,226
    Duke University—$461,375,625
    Washington University—$459,176,134
    University of California at San Diego—$423,519,464
    Yale University—$423,439,945
    University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill—$403,379,897
    Massachusetts General Hospital—$379,305,668
    Vanderbilt University—$376,657,197
    Stanford University—$364,514,668
    University of Wisconsin at Madison—$354,061,952
    Columbia University Health Sciences—$348,328,699
    Brigham and Women’s Hospital—$325,097,172
    Emory University—$315,839,038
    University of Minnesota Twin Cities—$293,186,539
    Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center—$274,403,654
    University of Alabama at Birmingham—$267,917,647
    University of Chicago—$258,899,657
    Scripps Research Institute—$256,647,467
    Baylor College of Medicine—$247,049,711

    Top 20 NIH-Funded Principal Investigators*

    William Busse, University of Wisconsin at Madison—$56,289,912
    Eric S. Lander, MIT—$53,669,831
    Barton F. Haynes, Duke University—$52,473,113
    Bruce Birren, MIT—$49,680,875
    Richard K. Wilson, Washington University—$45,729,213
    Richard A. Gibbs, University of Michigan at Ann Arbor—$36,999,139
    Gregory H. Reaman, National Childhood Cancer Foundation—$36,734,619
    Lawrence Corey, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center—$36,622,710
    Constance Ann Benson, University of California at San Diego—$34,628,572
    Lee Marshall Nadler, Harvard University Medical School—$33,822,019
    David R. Weir, University of Michigan at Ann Arbor—$31,620,211
    Sten H. Vermund, Vanderbilt University—$29,293,650
    Kathryn Hirst, George Washington University—$25,616,949
    S. Claiborne Johnston, University of California at San Francisco—$24,867,371
    Jay Arnold Tischfield, Rutgers—$23,969,195
    Laurence Howard Baker, University of Michigan at Ann Arbor—$23,699,999            
    John C. Reed, University of California at San Diego—$21,523,749
    Margaret Juliana Mcelrath, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center—$21,344,583
    Steven E. Reis, University of Pittsburgh at Pittsburgh—$21,334,727
    Daniel Ernest Ford, Johns Hopkins University—$21,179,300

    *Data Source: NIH Sales

Be sure to take the GEN Poll

Scientifically Studying Ecstasy

MDMA (commonly known as the empathogen “ecstasy”) is classified as a Schedule 1 drug, which is reserved for compounds with no accepted medical use and a high abuse potential. Two researchers from Stanford, however, call for a rigorous scientific exploration of MDMA's effects to identify precisely how the drug works, the data from which could be used to develop therapeutic compounds.

Do you agree that ecstasy should be studied for its potential therapeutic benefits?

More »