Although Dartmouth placed 77th among national institutions in a recent National Science Foundation report on federal research spending, the College would likely place higher in surveys that consider statistics that account for an institution's size and type like research dollars per faculty member according to faculty and staff members interviewed by The Dartmouth.
The NSF report, which was released last month, only considered the raw overall numbers for science and engineering spending.
"I'm virtually certain [Dartmouth] would rank higher," chemistry professor and department chair Peter Jacobi said, referring to a survey that would consider factors other than just total research spending.
Dartmouth's size and the College's emphasis on undergraduate education in addition to research puts it at a disadvantage in broad measures such as the NSF report, biology professor and department chair Thomas Jack said.
"The size of the research enterprise isn't the size that it is at other schools," he said.
It is also important to consider the scope of the report, Jacobi said. The report surveyed more than 700 institutions.
"One way of looking at it is a low ranking," he said. "But another way of looking at it is we're in the top 11 percent nationally."
Faculty and staff interviewed said there has been an increase in federal funding to Dartmouth researchers in recent years, largely due to individual success in winning grants and greater federal attention to science funding.
"There's been a conscious effort to increase funding for science infrastructure and science research," Jacobi said, pointing to initiatives started during former President George W. Bush's administration that sought to increase money for science research.
Jacobi a former member of the Committee on Chemistry and Public Affairs, a lobbying group that seeks to expand funding for chemistry research said federal funding for research in his department is "strong," but that there is room for improvement.
He added that the chemistry department recently hired four new faculty members and that junior faculty members are "beginning to see success" in their applications for research funding.
Other faculty, including Jack and physics and astronomy professor and department chair Miles Blencowe, also said funding is strong within their departments.
"Nearly all of our faculty are supported by faculty grants," Blencowe said in an e-mail to The Dartmouth.
It is difficult to say whether funding in certain departments has fared better than in other fields in recent years, according to Tom Drinane, manager of information systems for the Office of Sponsored Projects.
"It gets pretty involved, there's a lot of factors at play," he said. "There's also a lot of variability across campus in how these numbers are tracked."
Private funding typically plays less of a factor in supporting research, faculty said, though private institutions generally see a higher proportion of their research money come from industry than their state counterparts.
"The level of state versus private funding varies between state schools and private schools," Jacobi said. "The ratio is higher at private schools."
He added that although Dartmouth still primarily relies on federal funding, it is in line with other institutions in receiving private money.
Federal funding for research at the College has grown in recent years and will continue to grow in the near future because of an influx of grants associated with government stimulus money, according to Kathy Page, associate director of the Office of Sponsored Projects. But it is not clear whether that growth will continue with future cuts in the federal budget.
"There will be an increase over the next two or three years just because of those awards," she said. "But those awards will eventually go away."
Faculty also said that departments are unsure if funding will increase after researchers stop receiving stimulus money.
"The College has the intention to grow its research enterprise," Drinane said. "How successful we are will depend on a lot of things."
Research on science viewed as important, such as that on cancer, may give reason for federal officials to continue to give Dartmouth federal funds, he added.
The sagging economy and federal budget concerns raise questions, however, over how money will be directed, Jack said.
"[President Barack] Obama appears to be a strong supporter of science," he said. "But the overall federal budget situation is not good, and there are going to be some very hard decisions that have to be made."
Despite such concerns, the presence of College President Jim Yong Kim could spur funding, Jacobi said, adding that Kim's work in health care initiatives could help bring funding in similar disciplines to Dartmouth. He said, however, that such funding will likely take on a different form than in the past, with more collaborative grants designated to specific disciplines.
"I do think federal funding will continue to increase," he said.
