Photocopies of the biennial reports to the University of Florida President, 1952-1964, by the Director of Contract Resea...

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Photocopies of the biennial reports to the University of Florida President, 1952-1964, by the Director of Contract Research (98 pages)
Physical Description:
Unknown
Language:
English
Publication Date:
Physical Location:
Box: 1
Folder: University Archives Small Collections - Office of Contract Research (Series 53)

Subjects

Spatial Coverage:
North America -- United States of America -- Florida -- Alachua -- Gainesville

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID:
AA00003148:00001

Full Text


























BIENNIAL REPORTS

Office of Contract Research

1952-64








TABLE OF CONTENTS


1952-54 Biennial Report of the Office of Contract Research

1954-56 Biennial Report of the Office of Contract Research

1956-58 Biennial Report of the Office of Contract Research

1958-60 Biennial Report of the Office of Contract Research

1960-62 Biennial Report of the Office of Contract Research

1962-64 Biennial Report of the Office of Contract Research







































NB: Reports are separated by biennium with a plain yellow sheet
of paper.








RFPOBT O' OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH FOR 1952-1954


E I Grinter, Director of Research

The Office of Contract Research was established at the beginning of the fall
semester of 1952 and was placed under the dean of the graduate school acting as
the director of research. Its purpose is to correlate the contract research of
the entire university, particularly in regard to sponsor relationships. The
Director of Research is authorized to approve proposals for research contracts
and to conduct for the University the negotiations that lead up to the formation o
o
of formal contracts. Such contracts require the approval of the Board of Control
and receive legal approval of the State Attorney's Office.
o
Contract research is conducted with the Federal Government, with the State
CD
Government, with cities and counties, with industry and, occasionally, with
individuals. The greatest volume of these contracts at the University of Florida,
as at all other universities, is with agencies of the Federal Government. Such
contractual relationships for research are an outgrowth of the war research con-
tracts initiated in the early nineteen forties. Such contractual research has
grown in volume year by year until it is now approaching two million dollars
annually at the University of Florida. About one per cent of the total university
research of the Federal Government is conducted at the University of Florida.

It has seemed iLportant to the administration of the University that con-
tractual research be confined to fields and situations where it can contribute
to the educational objectives of the University. A few universities have
established very large contract research organizations almost wholly divorced
from the educational functions of the university. Such research organizations
have nearly separate staffs and completely separate adm-inistrations. To maintain
these staffs it often becomes necessary for such organizations to solicit con-
tracts quite divorced from educational value, often of a classified nature and
often of a developmental character rather than basic research. A certain amount
of such developmental work is appropriate to engineering research, but it has
very little usefulness elsewhere in a university. It has been the policy at
the University of Florida to encourage fundamental research in every possible
way.

-There has been concern over the question of stability as it relates to con-
tract research. 'hat would be the position of th University if wholoQale can-
collation or failure to initiate or extend contracts should become those policy o
the Federal Government? This ccacorn was gaera'lly felt by all universities
during the late nineteen forties. Lowever, the value of contract research is
now so thoroughly accepted by all asnrcies of the Foderal Government, including
the Department of Defense, that a recent five per cant reduction of overall
budgets of most Federal departments resulted in no roro than an equivalent
reduction in contracts with universities. Hence, it has become eviaont that a








long term continuation of contract research at about its present level is a
reasonable anticipation. An increase in volume at the University of Florida is
in fact almost certain as facilities for research at the University are increased
and as qualified research workers are made available.

The subject of overhead is a perennial problem in dealing with contract
research, The audited overhead on University contracts of the Department of
Defense exceeds fifty per cent of salaries. On the Other hand certain agencies
that sponsor only fundamental research such as National Science Foundation, Nation-
al Institutes of Health and Atomic Energy Commission allow only a fraction of this
overhead. The Office of Contract Research of the University of Florida has taken
the position that the audited overhead rate is the actual overhead of the Univer-
sity and that this rate should appear in essentially all contracts. However,
If the research involved is of a fundamental nature and of such character that
it would contribute directly to the objectives of the department concerned and
result in valuable publication, a contribution by the University of Florida may
appear as a part of the contract. By this procedure the right of the University
to collect the full audited overhead on all contracts of a developmental nature
or those initiated by the Sponsor, whether government or industry, is fully pro-
tocted.

A major difficulty experienced by the University of Florida in dealing on
a contractual basis with outside agencies lies in its lack of power to sign con-
tracts. Such agencies are themselves often hampered by governmental restrictions
that produce long delays in reaching agreement. When this stage of negotiation
is reached, it is necessary for the Office of Contract Research to inform the
outside agency that the final approval of a contract may require as much as
ninety days delay. Only after signature of the contract can the University
order equipment allowed by the contract so that many additional months can pass
before nmjor research work can begin. PRsearch workers in private universities
and in most public institutions now operate through Research Institutes or
Foundations that have the full right to accept contractual obligations. Through
such agencies it is possible even at a state university to purchase equipment
for research as soon as it is established that a meeting of minds has .on
place. A reserve fund can be built up out of overhead by such a Foundation so
that outstanding obligations are always properly covered, If the University of
Florida is to cnpete effectively in the field of contract research, it too
will zned the efficiency that becomes possible through the establishment of a
Research Foundation on the campus.

Statistical Information

Attached hereto are three semiannual summaries of research contracts in
force on July 1, 153, January 1, 1354, and July 1, 154, along with a sunnary
of all research contracts in force during tte bionnium. The annual r-te as of
July 1, 1954, was found to be 1,7u7,5S3.25, althour;h contracts in force at that
time amounted to $2,357,133.11.. e find that over the biennium there have ooen






total geatraocts t force of $3,473,210.41.

It is particularly important, I feel, to note that 27.11 per cent of these
research contracts have contributed to the growth of industry, that 5.75 per cent
have made a contribution to human health and that 4.28 per cent have been of
benefit to agriculture or forestry. Doubtless, with the building of our medical
school, the contracts of benefit to human health should increase greatly. Those cf
aid to agriculture could be increased sharply if the Agricultural Experiment
Station should develop its interest in the field of contract research as a means
of expanding the service now available through use of budgeted funds. It is
further noteworthy that 34.44 per cent of the contract research makes a direct
contribution to the national defense or safety while 28.42 per cent represents
basic research and educational contracts.

In conclusion it appears self-evident that the contract research program is
making a strong contribution to the development of the University of Florida. It
is building the research equipaont of the University and is supporting the research
efforts of a large number of staff members and of graduate students. Without
this amount of contract research, which approaches two million dollars annually,
it would be necessary for the University to expend nearly an equal amount to
maintain an equivalent stimulation through research. It is fully accepted that
research is on a par with education as fundamental objectives of a great univer-
sity as contrasted to an undergraduate college. Since the University of Florida
aspires to greatness as an educational institution it should make use of every
device, of which contract research is an important part, to encourage, broaden
and develop its program in basic research.









A J1 J? A 5 0 1 XX

Repot of Statistical Laboratory for 191-19$



During the biannium tho e oaertory has furnished cnaasltlnzg services nOd
computatioral facilities to research projects of graduate studenta, faculty
aOd staltl Jepartmi J putaLaLc. od cr agencte3 of the University aud tht
&tat*,, The LAzooratory Is cantiuiing a cootract vita Vright Air Dievelopment
Center oa a & pkam of uatbheatieal probabilities. 'Two doetowal disertations
and two or posflbly tbxee caster's thieotw are stesatn frI" tbis project, an
well as several tecalical reyorta. As a part of the Wright contract, the
Laboratory conducted a iympoaiua an Monte Carlo Methods at which significant
papers were presented amil ar. presently being edited for publishing.

The Laoratory saervd as bosts to the sixtieth meeting of the Institute
of kXattmatical Statistica and th* Ji~oloetrics i6Ociety, hLSA in Maroa 21).A
The Laboratory has entoraml ito an ugr-eetnwat with the r.* uthern iUsional &CdIa-
catior. ?oard, Viri~inia Polytoc'-Ani Inutittute and th C.:>aolldatad Uzakverj~t
of' orth Carolina to conduct a series of graduate sou r seassotns In statIV-
tir**E, writ tki u4loa a v tlre lorida CB5us u _,*iui-deu for toia tmmarr of
18 !a. e ti &LoT has ao.%aLqde4 In sOrvtces rendered as w;311 as in Itata
rar oqaipmoent during the last two years, and to becosina known both in the
$tate auid nationally.

The Strttlifal L&4xratory operaLt&sJ unQder &n aCL1xtl' director until July 1,
1VB3. in .-r. ILiarbart 4 yer vus cor.tirzmsd as riircaor., The ~tatisttcal
Lat)Qratory 1s dcvelc~poJ eA*1i1oit working relationsninM with ral&toitz d 'ert-
AIIA' Of t';Q Zn vorifity. it-ti t1*!LWI4* C iL$4t
TlA~ p::.ve 01i its A cL"Vity ira3 LI-vt Eo t~asd P,4r it of r,41;iCr to cover tl-e ca-t-
of malautalinIDX a staff and Mamhibn rentals to make statietlcsl services
vl~s~s to tirlo SIAX!~y ls t.1.0 ii-tute.









SJPPLE'Tk^AL REPORT
TO LIST OF CONTRACTS. FR- M TiiS OFFICE OF RESEARCH CONTRACTS
July 31 1953


ANALYSIS OF SOURCE OF CONTRACTS AND RESEARCH GRANTS


uoqported by. Department of Defen s

Sported by other Federal, State or Loca Gyer

Supported by Non=Proflt Fcundations oU So-etie

Sported by Industry or Industrial AsnocAations


7enft


'CAT1'GOESS OF SERVICE PERFOF dED BY CONTRACTS AND RESEILRCH GRANTS


S:\rct ProbaDbe_ Benefjt to Industry

Contribution to Human Health

-D.xrect Probable Benefi.t to Agiculturo or Forcst'-r _

.. Contrbution to the htiorl Safety (dnfenst) _

Basic RIsearch and Educational Contracts


.Amcnt Poereuarro

,3487222 8,629







Total $2:775o08.84 1000


$ .- 5 0 6lr 12 __80

; 528of, 002

0m ?6q52_

1. 066a 90. 2

.;" 30r' c^.c


*'o Total

:Note nmay projects contribute to more than one service objective* Honcoo the total of these colurmn would
be meaningless.


-- ---- ------- -- -E-~ -


- 1.~-- -- ----------- --`L"'LdrL;;I;L;jC~b;L;iL -










SOF IC OF RESEARCH CONTRACTS
Doceidbar 31, 1953


ANALYSIS OF SOURCE OF CONTRACTS AND RESEARCH GRANTS .


S-pparted by Department of D-fensao

Spportod bZ other Faderal, Stato or Local Govorrmiint

Sapportod Tiy DHon-Profit Founcdltions or Societies

Supported by Induct y or Industrial Ascociations


Araiou.tt

U C.H.(- ** u- *-w.- -

29 ,360,'0



230,073.03


Perc3 nt-.::.

63.g39
68039

16,,03

305

12o53


Total $ ,836,269.'20


1000


CATEGORIES OF SERVICE PER~FQNED BY CONTRACTS AND RESEAiRC! GRATS


Direct Probable Benefit to Indus^t

Contribution to Human Hoaith

Direct Probable Borfiit. to Apricl-~ur or Foe cy,

Contribution to the Ngation=l Safoty (t.dcocC)

Basic Research and Educational Contracts


---- ----ra- -i.-L----r ---ri--"
lr


una. s..aI


313.40A7,.,.20 29.93

O21o0._ ho76

9,) :.362o00 80,96
.- -t. 31. -.61

02 639,00 26)74


*No Totral

*Note many projects contribute to more than one service objectiveo Hence, the total of these oolunns would
be meaningless


m


---- -- -- ---- ----- -L---n-- -~`-----'---~------- r~rU~l~rP-r~-m~ul~IWYUCDI~IX3 -IU~-~YOI~)-~.~-ICCIPC~lLI~L9-


2M~D-~961-








OFFICE OF RESEARCH CONTRACTS
June 30, 1954

ANALYSIS OF SOURCE OF CONTRACTS AND RESEARCH GRANTS*

Ao.unt,

Supported by Department of Defense $2.f26Q,970o0 O

Supported by other Federal, State or Local Government 813,820o68

Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or Societies 37,696o00

Supported by Industry or Industrial Associations 2,A.61L8,23


Pertent7yo

53.696

34.526

1 599

10o379


Total $2,357,135o11



CATEGORIES OF SERVICE PERFORMED BY CONTRACTS AND RESEARCH OLANTS


1COo


Direct Probable Benefit to Industry

Contribution to Human Health

Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture or Forestr'c

Contribution to the National Safety defensee)

Basic Research and Educational Contracts


1 M 0 66i, 11

182 232F800

2P3n234.91



1,6.20, 22060


25.287

3 5, T3

3c939


?5MO5


*No Total

* Contracts with beginning date of July 1, 1954 or after, although listed on report, are not included
in these figures.

** Note many projects contribute to more than one service.objective. Hence the total of these columns
would be meaningless.


__


_ __


- __- _.__~ ---


- _._ __ __


_I-

















Supported bY Department of Dofen3s

Supported by other Federal0 State-

Supported by Non-Profit Foundatiot
fS ort+d bvIn Tr r otn+.wr Ty dstaria


Biennial Report
OFFICE OF RESSARCHF CONTRACTS

July 1, 1952 June 30, 1954

ANALYSIS OF SOURCE OF CONTRACTS AND RESEARCH GRANTS

Amount

a $108404o 205 ,40

or Local Goverramnt 1l. 07 i18828

is or Societies 113,976o 00

il Associations 445 8'40073


Total $39473,210o41 100.



CATEGORIES OF SERVICE PERFOIirED BY COI]TRACTS AND RESEARCH GRANTS


Direct Probable Benefit to Industry 22019,2ol! 27.1_

Contribution to Human Health 428 ,477.0 575

Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture or Forestry 3318.8?49_1 4.2

Contribution to the National Safety (defense) 2,565n0942440 5 34,44 _

pqsic Research and Educational Contracts 2,116 ,428_00 28.42

No Total

* Note many projects contribute to more than one service objective. Hence the total of these columns
would be meaningless.


Porcontaq



52,28


12-fl











REPORT OF THE OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH 1954-1956

L. E. Orinter, Director of Research



The attached statistical material gives a reasonably clear picture of
the contract research work of the University. The volume of contract re-
search today is almost wholly dependent upon the number of faculty mem-
bers with research interests in the fields of science and technology includ-
ing the health science fields. The volume of contract research is certain
to increase as the faculties in these fields expand. The rapid build-up of
contract research in the Health Center, for example, is merely a reflec-
tion of the fact that a number of professors with research interests have
been added to the staff in the medical sciences. Several departments not
now holding research contracts could do so if the criteria for selection of
personnel could be revised to increase the value attached to research ability
and imagination rather than teaching alone. Such are the criteria being ap-
plied in the medical sciences and in other areas of the University where
fundamental research contracts are common.

At the present time the Office of Contract Research is functioning as a
coordinating agency to achieve uniformity of the form of contracts, to pro-
tect the over-all interests of the University in the negotiation of contracts,
and to maintain a reasonable check upon the quality of contracts held by var-
ious units of the institution. The office also collects statistics and prepares
a semi-annual report.

A function strongly envisioned in the establishment of the Office of Con-
tract Research has not developed effectively. In r.ost institutions a percent-
age of the overhead is retained by the office of contract research or by a re-
search foundation and is used for the support and encouragement of funda-
nental research within the institution. The legal situation which turns all
overhead into the Incidental Fund militates against this normal support for
fundamental research at the University of Florida.

In each of the past four years plans have been developed for establish-
ment either by court action or by legislative decree of a Research Founda-
tion for the University of Florida. It becomes nore and more evident that
this is the only real solution to the present awkward procedures for obtain-
ing approval of contracts as well as for the problem of supporting fundamen-
tal research. The delays in obtaining approval of contracts continue to hold
down the number of contracts of the most attractive types that are negotiated.
The flexibility of operation of a 1*esearch Foundation in regard to such con-
troversial subjects as patents and overhead, as well as its contribution to the
solution of the problem of initiation of a contract before formal approval,









Report of the Office of Contract Research. 1954-1956. page 3.


along with its freedom to make binding agreements when necessary on short
notice are advantages that cannot ultimately be overlooked. In our competi-
tive situation it is not reasonable for the University of Florida to be the only
major research institution that appears to be so handicapped.

As an interim procedure, until a Research Foundation can be established,
it seems highly desirable to work out a formula for return of a percentage of
overhead, either to the Office of Contract Research or directly to the produce.
tive departments as an incentive for encouraging research. The University
of Florida should double its total research program in the next biennium,
particularly in fundamental fields. Every device for possible encouragement
and support of research needs to be used effectively.

During the past several years the Office of Contract Research has been
provided with funds to support research in special situations in the University.
Such funds have made possible the purchase of reasonably large pieces of
equipment or of scholarly research material that departmental or college funds
could not encompass. Such major equipment as an electron microscope or a
mass spectrograph can hardly be taken from a college budget since the pur-
chase of one such piece of equipment would require the entire annual budget
of a college. The other significant service provided by a special research
equipment fund is to provide for special situations not envisioned in the plan-
ned budget. Since budget planning precedes expenditures by a full year, such
changes and development of special needs are inevitable, particularly in that the
needs of new staff members cannot be anticipated fully in departmental budgets.
The distribution of research funds by the Office of Contract Research for the
1954-1956 biennium is indicated on the following page.










APPENDIX


Contributions to Departments for Purchase of Research Supplies
and Equipment, 1954-56


Cancer Research
College of Business Administration
College of Education
College of Pharmacy


Department
Department
Department
Department
Department
Department
Department
Department
Department
Department
Department
Department
Department
Department
Department
Department
D ear t-ent
Department
Department
Department


of Agronomy
of Animal Husbandry
of Art
of Bacteriology
of Biology
of Botany
of Chemistry
of Civil engineering
of Community Planning
of Dairy Science
of Electrical Engineering
of engineering Mechanics
of English
of nLtor-ology
of Geography
of History
of Laustrial Arts luducation
of Industrial Engineering
of fhathernatics
of tlecaa.ical engineeringg


Department of Philosophy
Department of Physics
Department of Political Science
Department oi Poultry Husbandry
Department of Sociology
Department of Speech
Florida State I.useum
Statistical Laboratory
University Library


$ 1131.00
1005. 00
2370. 00
1400. 00
1294. 00
775.00
2065.00
1860. 00
1768. 02
1120.CO
5385. 00
450. 00
900. 00
500. 00
1180.00
1000.00
450. 00
V60. 00
1030. 00
680. 00
120.00
375. 00
1000.00
500. 00
75. 00
3800. 00
615.00
350. 00
625.00
1435.00
950.00
1450.00
2800.00


$41,568. 02


TOTAL








OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH


JUNE 30, 1956


Analysis of Sources of Contracts and Research Grants


Amount


Percentage


Supported by Department of Defense o.0 0o0 o0 0o 00
Supported by other Federal, State, or Local
Government oo ooo a. a 0 ooo 0oo 0 0 0 0
Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or Societies .
Supported by Industry or Industrial Associations ..

Total face value of contracts in force 0o o o o o o
Face value divided by years ir force o oooooooo.
Research backlog or unexpired value of
contracts in force as of June 30, 1356 o........


$2, 528, 848.21

779, 361.00
63, 360.00
196, 850. 00

$3, 568, 419.21
1,607, 160.21

1. 334, 776. 30


Breakdown by College


Agriculture and Forestry ... oooo oo..... o ....
Arts and Sciences ........... 000000000000000000000
Cancer Research 0 0 00 0 ......... 0 0 0 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Med~c 000iC 00 0000 00 000 0 000 0000o 00000 00000 00
M IP eu oooo oooT.ooo oooooooooooooo0oooooooooo

Statirtlacal .L..ab..Or.tOry o o o o oooo o o o oo o oo


Total


$ 415, 345.00
275,554.00
189, 031.00
2,588, 890, 21
33,699.00
5, 200. 00
50, 0000 00
10,700o 00

$3, 568, 419. 21


Categories of Service Performed


Direct Probcbo E- erfit to l duatry a 0 o 0 0 oa o 0 o0
Contribution to H1uman Health .o 0 o0 o 00 0 0 00 0 ..
Direct Probable eneit to Ag ricult ure & Fore~tryo
Cotribution to th- Natincal Safety iD.fe e) ......
Basic Research &nd Educatioral Corntracts ..0000 ... 0 0


$2,861,140. 21
521, 096. 00
270, 695o 00
2, 351, 5090 00
1, 630, 615. 21


80, 54
14. 66
7, 62
66, 19
45 90


*No Total

*Many project contribute to more thn. one service objective, hence a total of
tb.his group would be rneaiv.glcsso


70. 87

21.94
1.73
5.54






OFFICE OF RESEARCH CONTRACTS
DeceBver 31, 1955

ANALYSIS OF SOURCES OF CONTRACTS AND P.SEARCH GRANTS

----. .- --:- ,-Amount FPor.1nt.ae

Sunprted jby Departmeunt of Dafense 1933,788.40 68.87

Supported by other Federal. Statm or Local Govrnm__nt _92,985_00

SuorP td Non-Profit FourdatiJns or S)ieoties 28,64.57 1.02

Supogrted by Industry or Industxal ji Qgsacciatiggns 2_25650.00_ .,99_

Total face value of contracts in force $2,807,978.917 LO.
Fasce vaue of contracts divided by years in fore 1,676Z130.00
Research Backlog or unexpirqd value of contras.ts
in forcp 951 ,694.00

SREAK-DOWIJ BY COLLEGE

Agri.ut3ur6 -e 351 .518. 00

At. _and. Sigetcz 294.998.57



Egr_ _. .. 1., _875 o967.60o

Museum 6200.*00

StatJs-i cal Laboratory _30,616.80__
Pbaracy 000 0 00
bta l $2,807)978.97

CATEGORIES 05 SBERViCB RFiL ,Y C TI'ACTrS AND MBS8ARCH GRANTS

D pet Probable Beef t, tao I._ vstr -. i74r62 97 77-44

buton o ran health 371 ,00 3

DSirect Pmable enefft to st_ o5873O0 s .0o 12o.7 Gs

Co_ telrtlon., to the atoL SfFe.-de 0~e____,40 _39.83

BaeI esew rA Educa-irlt.o. 1. 267.480. 57_ 46.A4

N u Total

* mN.t nany projects ezatribute fto tre than ow9 osrvlice objestlvweo Ience the total
of thBse olumBina would bft s maninglesa-






OFFICE OF RESEARCH CONTRACTS
June 30, 1955

ANALYSIS OF SOURCE OF CONTRACTS AND RESEARCH GRANTS*

Amount
Suppted by Department of Dafense $,1896,261.04

Supported by other Federal. State or Local Government 522.414.80

Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or Societies 55,736,57

Supported by Industry or Industrial Associations 208,437,50

Total face value of contracts in force $2,682,849.91
Face value of contracts divided by years in force $1,571,007,00

BREAK-DOWN BY COLLEGE*


Percentage
.70M681

19.472

2.078

7.769

100.


Agriculture 279.579d30

Arts qand Scipenaes 344,850-57

Bmsicss Adniinistration 5 ,O0000

Cancer Research 1E9 305,00


lu n I. 1,6417,6M24~

Luse= 3.1,200-00
__________________ 1.647648,2


Statistical ___ ___tor_________

Totat $2,682,849,91
CATEGORIES OF SRIVICS PERiOF2ti) BY CONlTACTS AND RESEARCH GPANTS

Direct Prob&arl cr ofit t,,_Thdustrv 2 089,121,81 78.242

Contr:butirn Vc ) Hnan F.-lth 361,842.00 13,487

Direct rn.b~erefit to or or-stxt 4O7,8. 15.203

Coiitribul cn-to the National Salty 1 560 9M40 58,181

BDzic Fosqarch ard Fductfiona Contracts i.239 445.21 46.199




Cocnrarts Y-Ith be2i-iaia date of July 1, 1S55 or feftcr, al.tholj-h listed en ropyrt, rar
nct. ii~elLd-* 3i those figuroos

*%%N.;)ttc -any pr-i>jc's cnitribute to :wre' tb4.he ora 'e rvica objective. 1Ja2cs the total of
ttesz columns would be eanini.l.ss,


Ill







OFFICE OF RESEARi COKT.ACTS
December 312 194%

ANALYSIS OF SOURCE OF CONTRACTS AND RES A15~CGH SRA-S*



Supported by Dparftment of Defena $1 _94714 369. ____

Suportodby other Federal, State or Lmcil Govcrrjnm_ 467,13 00

Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or Societias P481.CO_ _

Supported by Industry or Industrial Assosiationa 169.24B8.23


TCATOtl ,258,2 z .C

CATEGORIES OF SERVICE PERFORMED 5y CC T:'AC'S Ai:D


S3F5EARCH GRANTS


Direct Probable Benefit to IndvOtzry

Contribution to Human Heal th

Dire t Probable Benefit to AgricOture or ForaCtry

Contribution to the National Safe defensee)

Basic Research and Eidaational CoInaates


l.4 ,l91l.40



341, Q 23



S1.6a491.20


-IC -n-


15.410


- -- -- --




- --- U


&nHo Total


S Contracts with beginning date of January l, 1935 or af ter, althae:i, l.iAd o rp ar?, r insludId in
these figures.

1* Note many projects contribute to more than one service objcttivoo. !I=tn th,. tlo tal cf those CoI ~s
womld be meaningless. This um.nary shouldd not bo compared with .:r'ovic -.', z'ics uince ;o cateoori'ns
of contracts have been redefined to present a more realistic pi car. o


79.59





7,49


100,00


---~~- ---~


I 1'


-- --- --I--- -i ------- ------ ---












REPORT CF THE DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH
OF THE UNIVEiSITY OF FLORIDA
FOR THE BIENNIUM, 1956-58

L. E. Grinter, Director


The 1Y56-58 biennium was a period of increased activity in research for

the University of Florida. Since the research programs of the organized re*

search stations and bureaus will be covered in the reports of separate areas

of the University. this staLer~ent will cover the areas of the University not

formraily organized for reeserca. It will also present certain statistics on

over-all research activity.


Research Council Activities

The activities of the Research Council were considerably expanded

during the past biennium. Since it was concluded that too much attention of

the Research Council had been given to patent matters, a Patents Subcommit-

tee was established. This committee investi,:ates patent claims and reports

to the Director of Research who is authorized tV r;iove approved requests

forward for study by the Research Corporation of New York or by the Board

of Control, as may bo appropriate. The Research Council receives a re-

'rt fr- m the P-atents ;ubcormnitaee ot each regular, r meeting. The research

CouZ.cil has been given re.ponsibility for asCigning prcrcrities for award of

O(CO fuds for research. In two mcetincg for th 19'57-58 academic yeor

it arsigned priorities for the transeir of some $43, 000. 00 of OCO iunds,

'Total OCO funds distributed during the biennium to de.artmrents for the







conduct of research amounted to $67. 500. 00. These funds are in part in the

regular budget of the Graduate School and in part they are made available from

industrial contracts which provide for a contribution to University research

equipment as a compensation for patent rights. The Research Council also

studied requests for summer research assignments by faculty members and

established priorities on such requests. Eleven such assignments for the

summer of 1958, with two month'e compensation for the faculty members

involved, resulted from this activity of the Research Council.


Proposal for I:esearch 'acuxity assignmentss

Cutside thae areas cio Agricul turae a nd ,.gi.ering. research has been sub-

sidised by overtime work io the Laculty in too great a degree. To reduce fac-

ulty teaching loads by two credit hours per semester would increase the edu.

national salary budget.by 15 per cent. It is believed that a far greater stimu-

lation of research would be accoimplished if 5 per cent of the overall salary

fund were made available to the Research Council for assignment to depart-

ments to provide a free semester for research by individual faculty members.

Such assignmentss would be made only after study and approval of each pro-

posed research project in relation to the probability that it would result in

scholarly publication. It is therefore recounmended that a salary budget fur

support cf research should be provided for the 19519-61 biennium to cover

those rrces of the University not presently osrgnized for research activity.


Resrc.h Co:tracts

In the aroa of contract research the growth can be measured rather easily

from the face value of active res-earch contracts. In the serriannual reports







from the Office of Contract Research the following amounts, representing

total face value of contracts in force, are arranged in sequence of six-month

intervals: December 31, 1956, $3.964, 344; June 30, 1957. $4, 750, 346;

December 31, 1957, $4,610, 152; June 30, 1958, $4, 273,718. Hence, the

face value of research contracts increased 20 per cent during the first six

months of the biennium but dropped back to a net increase of 8 per cent at

the end of the biennium. The loss of contract value over the second year of

the biennium may be traced to policy of the Defense Department in cancelling

and restricting contracts in the pro-Sputnik period. Although only a few con-

tracts were cancelled, many were slowed down to reduce expenditures, and

newly expired contracts were not renegotiated. Such an influence takes more

than a year to reverse. Its influence is still being felt in the University.


Proposal for Research Foundation

Investigation has shown that nearly all institutions having a large volume

of contract research operate such contracts through a Research Foundation

or Institute, although the actual research usually is performed by the de-

partmental staffs of the regular academic departments. Such a holding or-

ganization for research contracts always is given the legal right to negotiate

and sign contracts, to accumulate and expend overhead or other funds not

directly required to complete the research, to receive and dispense glits,

and to hold and exploit patents for the benefit of the university's research pro-

gram. It is evident from its universality that there is a high usefulness in the

organized research foundation in maintaining strong competition for a large

volume of the most attractive research contracts. It is therefore recom-
mended that the University of Florida adopt this form of organisation.
















SUMMER RESEARCH APPOINTMENTS. 1958


There have been requests each year from faculty members who

desired summer appointments to devote wholly to research. In

the past these requests have had to be denied because of a shortage

of funds. For the first time it became possible to make a group

of appointments for the summer of 1958. Each individual has been

appointed for a two-month period at the regular summer rate for

teachers. It is believed that each of these appointments will re-

sult eventually in a significant research or scholarly publication.

The appointments for 1958 were for the following individuals:


Bernard Aratowaky
Ernest DuPraw
W. M. Jones
Harry Kantor
H. B. Segel
S. L. Grisaby
Andrew Sobszyk
M. J. Roberts
7. J. V;'Lcer
H. J. Doherty
G. J. Hofiman


Foreign Language Dept.
Biology Dept.
Chemistry Dept.
Political Science Dept.
Foreign Language Dept.
Sociology Dept.
Mathematics Dept.
Economics Dept.
University College
University College
University College


Dr.
Dr.
Dr.
Dr.
Dr.
Dr.
Dr.
Dr.
Dr.
Dr.
Dr.















RESEARCH AT THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


The Office of Contract Research publishes a biennial volume en-

titled Research at the University of Florida. This publication is

intended to give a visual picture of areas of research of particular

interest to large sponsors such as the agencies of the federal govern.

meant. It is not possible in a limited publication to cover more than

a small part of the total research program of the University. Hence,

those areas of research that may be presented visually to advantage

have received the greatest amount of space. A personal check upon

the use of this publication by the Director of Research has shown

that it is serving an effective purpose in calling attention of spon.

scoring agencies to the widespread research activity of the University

of Florida. A program that exceeds four million dollars in face

value of contracts requires some attention of this nature in terms

of annual promotion to assure its continuation without the possibility

of a ccrious loos of vclunae.









SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH


The confusion attendant upon use of different forms for research contract

proposals by different areas of the University has led to the development of

an official signature page, a copy of which follows. This page is attached

to each official proposal for a research project. It assures the Office of

Contract Research that the proper college officials have considered and

approved the proposal. It also directs the sponsor to the proper person for

addressing his correspondence. Its signature by the Director of Research

of the University of Florida is evidence that it has been considered in re-

lation to the over-all objectives of the University and has been accepted.

The increased number of proposals and contracts has increased the

clerical load on the staff of the Graduate School to the point that it became

necessary to appoint an individual to serve as a central contact on all re-

search activities and to check proposals and other documents involved.

This individual also prepares statistics on research projects, including the

semiannual list of current projects released as of January 1 and July 1 of

each year. Full semiannual lists are too voluminous to attach, but summaries

for July 1956, January 1957, July 1957 and January 1953 are attached. The

Office of Contract Research also rxaintains a service to faculty members in

terms of a current address list of all foundations along with the best avail-

able statements as to their objectives in the support of scholarly work. Ad-

dresses and names of officers of all foundations and government agencies en-

gaged in sponsorship of research can usually be provided on a current basis.
These lists are corrected regularly.





UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


APPROVAL OF RESEARCH PROPOSAL


Date


Title of Proposal-....................... ............................................................................................................................


.. ..... ................ .................................................. ...... oo......................................................................................................


University Agency Responsible for Research:


Submitted to: (Sponsor)


Recommended by:

Principal Investigator:


Name:
Title:


Approval by Dean or Director:


Department Head:


Name:
Title:



Accepted for University:


Name:
Title:


Name:
Title: Director of Research, University of Florida





Instructions to the Sponsor for addressing correspondence:








131786







OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH


December 31, 1956


Analysis of Sources of Contracts and Research Grants


Amount

Supported by Department of Defense. o .. $2, 593, 226. 21
Supported by other Federal, State, or Local
Governments ... ..... 1, 026, 093. 00
Supported by.Non-Profit Foundations or Societies. 67, 905. 00
Supported by Industry or Industrial Associations. 277, 120. 00
$3 96,34,2


Total face value of contracts in force. .
Face value divided by years in force. 9 o o a a
Research backlog or unexpired value of
contracts in force as of December 31, 1956. .* ..


Percentage

65.41

25. 88
1.71
6.99


$3,964,344. 21
$1,914,438.00

$1,890,695.00


Breakdown by College


Agriculture and Forestry, ...... .
Arts and Sciences, .... .. ... .o
Cancer Research* o.. ... .
Engineering .. o o0 o 0 0 0 .
Medicine .. .. .. ..... o ..
Museum. o .. ... ... .* ... .
Pharmacy, .. 0 . ... 0 .0
Statistical Laboratory .. .. e .* .


$ 532, 502. 00
358, 622.00
221,756.00
2,611,718.21
171,846.00
5,200.00
50,000.00
12, 700. 00


$3, 964, 344. 21


Categories of Service Performed


Direct Probable Benefit to Industry, .
Contribution to Human Health. . ..
Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture & Forestry.
Contribution to the National Safety (Defense).. .
Basic Research and Educational Contractso .


$2,845,339.21
783, 982. 00
471,030. 00
2, 395, 132. 00
1, 816, 588, 21


No total*

*Many projects contribute to more than one service objective, hence
a total of this group would be meaningless.


71.72
19.77
11.88
60. 39
45. 89







OrnCS OF CO' XTRCT U3SEARC


June 30, 1957

Analysis of Sources of Contract and Rsearch Grants


Amount


rcentage


Supported by Departmnt of Defense..............
Supported by other Federal, State, or Local
Govornrent. ..... ..... o..S o*** SoSO .. S o
Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or
Societles...................................
Supported by Industry or Industrial
AMooiation. ..................... ...........

Total face value of contracts in force......
Face value divided by years in force........
Research backlog or unexpired value of
contracts in force as of June 30, 1957


$3,371,221.56

925.895.60

86,537.00

366,692.00

$4,750,488.16
2,448,972.10

1,513,180.94


Breakdown by College


Agriculture and Forestryt.................*.....
Arts and Sciences......... CCC...... .
Business Aduminiitration..........ooe.o.........
Cancer .......... CC.... .........C .

StagistincalLaboratory ......................



.......ca .....................................


$ 600,501.60
398,563.00
26,000.00
75,234.00
51,607.00
3,378,232.56
255,808.00
6,000.00
25,000.00
36.400.00


$4,750,346.16

Categories of Service Performed


Direct Probable Benefit to Industry..0..........
Contribution to Human Health....................
Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture and
Forestry... ..................,..............
Contribution to the National Safety (Defense)...
Basio Research and Educational Contracts........


$3,669,328.56
586,969.00

454,275.60
2,938,773.56
2,007,729.60


*No Total

*Many projects contribute to more than one service objective, hence a total of this
group would be meaningless.


70.96

19.74

1.34

5.54


TT.02
10.02

8.91
61.83
42.26







OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH
December 3?. Q9?7

Aaalysit of Sources of Cortract and Research Grsatt

AmpCouAt P# rcetSaKt r


"upported by Department of Defaese ., .
bupported by otber Federta, 5tate, or Local

supsortietd by Non-Profit Fou daions or
Soccer ies c ... .. .... . o
Supported by industry or lSadutrial
A sociatotl a -. .. .. .. .. .

Total iace v-aue of cr.trats in force ., ,
'ces value divided by, ye'rs -i force ...
ReVearch backlog or umeixpired value of
comtraicts in force as of Dec. 3L 1957 ..


$2, 656, 532, 56

1,440, 582.. 00

177, 722, 00

335, 316, 00

$ 4,610,, 152, 56
2. 459, 10i, 64

1, 534,, 198,, 45


Breakdown by Coalege


.1


/ P culture and Fhreatry ,
.Artp .aas Sciences
-.sic:aess Adminhistrson ,.
i':,Ar e Research

.*ingifeerng

Mu Ph'bar, a btti~~ical Lbaboratory t
Ot < -


S *> .* < o
2 r 0 *' .0 ,


* ?) 7 0 0 >





a C 0 ..

,, V


S $ 311, 40, )00
. c 468, 384, 00
., 26,, 100,.
. .. 111, 0 :(, O0
o ". 63, 063., 00
2. 971,848. 56
,. 515, 085. 00
13, 400. 00
S ., 25..000, 0
29, 900, 00
S 75,, 000.. 00
-T,60,m 15 z, 56


GCatgories of Servici Performed


Direct Probable 'Staiit to lad try .
Contribuoan to HumaB HAlt n .
Direct Probablf entitt to Ag ri Forestry .. .. .. .. .
Coarxbutio0t to thq NusiaoneAl Afety ;(Defeiase
BAsic Renarch a-fd E.dicatii*UfLl Canltracts .


$ 3, 055, 464, 56
806,, 792. 00

319, 777. 00
2, 546, 568, 56
2, 429, 577,. 00


-No Total

tMahy projects contr-ibut-? to ,miore tVaw rMu vervviCeO- objective, mc, a' ttal off
thia sgraup woulS4

57,. 62

31. 25

3,86

7, 27


66, 28
170 50

6, 94
55, 4t
s52 70






OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH


June 30, 1958

'Analysis of Sources of Contract and Research Grants

Amount


Supported by Department of Defense ..
Supported by other Federal, State, or Local
Government . .
Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or
Societies . . .
Supported by Industry or Industrial
Associations .. . .

Total face value of contracts in force .
Face value divided by years in force .
Research backlog or unexpired value of .
contracts in force as of June 30, 1958 .


$ 2, 522, 514. 56

1,186,374.93

214,668.71

350, 160.00

$ 4. 273, 718. 20
2, 260, 740. 39

1,402, 085.66


Percentage

59.02

27.76

5.02

8.20


Breakdown by College


Agriculture and Forestry . .
Arts and Sciences .. .. .. .
Business Administration . .
Cancer Research .......... ..... .
Education ................... .
Engineering ........... .
Medicine . .. .
Museum . ..... ... .
Pharmacy .. ... .
Statistical Laboratory . .
Other .. . ....


301,323. 00
437, 017. 00
2, 100.00
102,084.71
94,118.00
2,646,393.56
483,030.00
26,800.00
29,800.00
53, 511.93
97,540.00


$4, 273,718.20

Categories of Service Performed


Direct Probably Benefit to Industr .
Contribution to Human Health . .
Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture and
Forestry . ........
Contribution to the National Safety (Defense) .
Basic Research and Educational Contracts .

*No Total


$ 2,864,234.00
871,914.71

375, 180.00
2,234, 131.56
2, 083, 189. 71


*Many projects contribute to more than one service objective, hence a total
of this group would be meaningless.


No.

56
37
1
12
2
41
44
3
1
18
3

218


67.01
20.40

8.78
52.28
48.74























APPENDIX


Contributions to departments for library purchases

Contributions to departments for research equipment

Source of funds used to supplement departmental
purchases of research equipment and library
materials

Memorandum of June 27, 1958


















Contributions to Departments for Library Purchases
fr.nm Ra.nmarch Funds 1.56-56


Department of English

Department of Foreign Languages

Department of Geography

Department of Geology

Department of History

School of Inter-American Studies

Department of Political Science

University Libraries

University College
Total


$ 1655.00

50.00

160.00

450. 00

615. 00

100.00

2439.50

400.00

10. 00
$ 5949. 50


* This is in addition to $9, 000.00 expended by the Graduate
Council









Contributions to Departments for Research Squipment
1956-58
Department of Aeronautical engineering $ 4,000.00

Department of Agronomy 624,40

Department of Animal Husbandry & Nutrition 2,318.00

Department of Art 367.45

Department of Bacteriology 1,500.00

Department of Biology 8,575.00

Department of Botany 1,730.00

Department of Building Construction 400.00

Department of Canoer Research 200,00

Department of Chemical Xngineering 1.790.00

Department of Chemistry IT.257.40*

Department of Civil Engineering 1,297.00

Department of Dairy Science 275.00

Department of Economics 450.00

Department of Electrical Engineering 700.00

Department of Entomology 800,00

Department of Foundations of Education 200,00

Department of Geography 618.80

Department of Geology 462.00

Department of History 850.00

Department of Macbanical Engineering 1,560.00

Department of Ornam'ntal Horticulture 200,00

*Ir.cluding 0o per cent of special research equipment fund in
Chemistry DopartL aut contracts







Contributions for ep4earch iauipoJnt (ooutinued)


Department of Physice

Department of Plant Pathology

Department of Political scienoe

Department of Psychology

Department of Sociology and Anthropology

Department of Speech

Department of Veterinary Science

College of Arts and Sciences

College of Education

College of Pharmacy

College of Physical Education and Health

Florida State Museum

Department of Personnel Services

TOTAL


$ 6,450.00

800.00

700.00

1,600.00

700.00

680.00

2,348.00

200.00

810.00

450.00

310.00

800.00

197.00

$58,080.75














Source of Funds for Research Equipment and Library Materials


Special Research Equipment Fund

-Dow Chemical Company

Grace Research and Develop-
ment Division of W. R. Grace
and Co,

Kopper Company. Inc.
Total


Graduate School Budget
Total

Grand Total


1956-57

$ 1.-.000 -

5,000



5, 000
$ 11,000


1957.58

$ 1,000

5.000



5,000
$ 11,000


13, 500 32, 000
$ 24-"0 $ 43,000

$ 67, 500








UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
Gainesville



Graduate School June 27, 1958
Office of the Dean




TO: Deans, Directors and R~search Project Supervisors

FROM: L. E. Grinter, Director of Research



We are unquestionably entering a period of intense competition for
scientific personnel in which salaries will inE itably increase. For ex-
ample, recent studies of government agencies ~.r foundations have anticipated
salary increments of 50 per cant to 100 p~r cent in ton yearSo

Typical research contract proposals are for two years, but some extend
as far as five years into the future. Such proposals are ofton for the same
total annual contribution for successive y rrs. This memorandum is sent for
the purpose of requesting that estimates beyond ons year tsake account of to
salary factors (1) normal salary incrcac=nts anticiprtod for continuing personnel,
(2) salary increments of about 5 per cent per year to allow for possible national
adjustments of salaries of scientific personnel.

It is evident that any estimate oi' snla.cLcos for the future is little more
than a guess. However, in those O~.se; wi;ero -e hs.ve adjusted salaries upward
in research proposals extending tyondr one ycar ths cscnsoring agency has shown
no dissatisfaction. Hence, in order to protect tLe quality of our research
effort, I feel that adjustments as sg~oested abovo represent the desirable pro-
cedure.










UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
GAINESVILLE


July 22, 1960
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OFFrci OF Tm DAN













Dr. J. :-.n 2iltz, PcitiSent
-: P.' ..l. "' .-" .on ,-.il& ing


Der Dr. Ileitz:

Attac ,i I'.i.:o.rith ie tho oi :'n-Ll fli tiro copies of the
Biennial Jinozt o.' the Office of Contract Pleearch for the period
19, .-... O.

Sincerely yours,



L. D. Grintcr
DiUector of Iocccarch










Report of the Director of Research, 1958-60 Biennium
L. E. Grinter


Contract research and outside research grants increased steadily

in volume during the 1958-60 biennium. At the beginning of the period

the face value of such sponsored research was $4,273,718.20. This

figure has increased to $5,241,481.57 two years later. The annual rate

of expenditure had increased in somewhat greater proportion from

$2,260,740.39 to $3,179,389.23 per year, an increase of 40 per cent.

However, this simile measure of dollar volume gives a wholly inadequate

picture of the quality of the research and its increased significance

to the University.

Quality of -oCeairh.--It is the purpose of every great university

to contribute to the fund of fundamental kano.l:ge available to teachers

and EtueInto in hur-mities, science and social fields. Fundamental

resea-ch h23 th single objective. The percentage of the total spon-

sored research prog;-rm of the University that can properly be classified

as basic rather than directed toward an immediate or closely defined

material objective has also increased greatly during the past two years.

As a quanttitative rn.ure of this change in the quality of research one

may e:cine te norccn-tae of the research program sponsored by the two

great Fedreral Ecncies that sponsor only funTiiental research, the

National Eci~nce. 2oun^:tion .anC. the t :etion-l Inztitutes of Health. At the

begirning of the bienninu these agencies were sponsoring research grants











having a face value of $830,390.00 or 19.4 per cent of the total. By

the end of the biennium the dollar volume of these basic research grants

had risen to $1,942,150.00 or 37.1 per cent of the total.

Another measure of the quality of the research program of the Univer-

sity of Florida may be noted in the number of the private Foundations

that appear on the list of sponsors. Such sponsors are greatly sought

by university professors since their funds are given on the freest pos-

sible terms. During the biennium the following private Foundations made

grants to the research program of the University of Florida

American Chemical Society Phipps Florida Foundation

Americ.a Cancer Society Research Corporation

American Heart Association Resources for the Future, Inc.

Florida Tuberculosis Association The Rockefeller Foundation

Ford Foundation William and Marie Selby Founda-
tion
National Foundation
Social Science Research Council
Elsa U. Pardee Foundation
iLeuorial Cancer aFund, Inc.
Nutrition Foundation, Inc.


A:-.lied Rese~trch.--In the reports of the Director of the Agricultural

Experiment Station, tLe Director of tl-c Enginc.ring ani Industrial Experi-

ment Station ani cj;.il.rz if srmzler Crcncies elewhere in the University

one may gain a picture of important ; contributions of the University toward

research in applioel sience 2: sel:li:l social science. Such contributions

are e:uc,'ted to be of created import to the inmrediate development of the

State of Florida than the research in basic science. nevertheless, as












the areas of applied research are worked over by successive generations

of investigators it becomes more and more clear that a quite fundamental

approach is required to solve even the most applied problems. Hence, the

personnel of these research agencies continue to increase in scientific

background as young scientists and social scientists are added to the

staffs.

Year by year it appears that there is less distinction between

research in chemistry or physics and research in certain areas of engin-

eering or befteen botr-ny or biology end comparable research in agriculture.

The great change in all science areas is the continual shortening of the

time lag between the development of new knowledge and the research needed

to ;k'-e such ku"c.ledge of practical values in agriculture, engineering or

medicine. This observation points to a stronr; advantage of the University

of Floric- v'hlich is one of three or four institutions that have essentially

all of the araze of brsic research and applied research associated on a

single ceru--u vere cocorative ez:changoe of mnl.edGe rmay be achieved

without recourse to the channels of publication alone.

Hi nani-.tic anid Social Science Research.--Finally, it is necessary to

point with concern to the relative emphasis placed by national sponsors

on anpied. r^e)evrch, ba-sic research in science, fund~Lrental research in

the social sciences !adl scholarly wrork or research in hum;:nistic areas.

The volume o.f ionioredl projects c.ecreases rapidly in the orler indicated.

The past bLenni~t has seen certain adjustme-ts in the right diection. As

indicated above the z-ponsorIlhip of basic research in the sciences has











increased absolutely and relatively. And at the same time research in

the social sciences has gained an element of sponsorship that was almost

wholly missing a few years ago.

Unfortunately, sponsorship of humanistic studies is still so limited

that for practical purposes such research must be wholly supported by

the University. As long as this situation obtains it will be incumbent

upon all universities to be certain that teachers of the humanities are

given reasonable freedom for personal research, that they are provided

with assistants to relieve them of some of the drudgery that is inevit-

able in teaching large classes of undergraduates, and that their very

real needs for library assistance and aid in neetiSn the costs of publica-

tion of scholarly work are not overlooked. It is merely realistic that

a part of the overhead charges collected from sponsors of applied and

basic scientific research be uSed to this end.











zurcer Research Appointments, 1960


By action of the Researech Councll and approval by the

Prcci'lent, the folloCTir. faculty cpr-ointEnnts for research

during the emnar of 1960 were approved. Each individual was

aptointca for a t;r-o-month period at the res-ular s-oar rate as

a toachcr. -zIt bclievedi tb;at e:ch of these appointments will

result eventually 'n a sI,.fcant r-secz-ch or scholarly publi-

cation. The pr ointmcnts for 1960 vere for the following

indiv-lcal :

,-r. 7. A. Payne C-! Donpn-tcmnt
?-. -i. II .Cov n;ton Art Departnent
Dr. B,. B. Vo:.les english De-?art-ment
Dr. E. G,. fo.. -nZ :Political Coience Depaw--u.ent
Dr. 0. v vnrlcn Political Oclence De3-nartmnt
Dr. A, A. Lyroyloc R'nyics De-artment
D". :. -un2 -?ych-olo..v Dcpait'tnt
Dr. J' 21. I. Iae --olo"o:- ia'-z.*ir:ont
Dr. G. ,. I yschievitsch Chemicter: Departtmnt
2r. P. l Ecoacc DI-


Alternates


Dr. U. 0. *iTeoyuch


Art Do2. rt;ent
L:r Collce-ea
Lcon=ics De-partIment








UNIVERSITY OF FIDRIDA
Gainesville


The Graduate School
Office of the Dean July 15, 1960








Dr. J. Wayne Reitz, President
University of Florida
226 Administration a uining
Campus

Dear Dr. Reitz:

I am enclosing a copy of the Semiannual Report on Research
Contracts and Grants current in my office as of Jiae 30, 1960.

The total face value of the contracts and grants listed is
$5,241,481.57. A very rouh estimate of the annual rate is com-
puted by dividing the face value of each contract by the years in
force, which was determined as of June 30, 1960 to be $3,179,389.23.
The summary analysis also includes an item called Research Back-
log. This is an estimate of the unexpired value of contracts as
of Jue 30, 1960 and it is ccoputed from the face values divided
by the years in force and multiplied by the unexpired period.

As in the last previous report' this semiannual umnary includes
total amounts received for new contracts and grants and the amount
received due to extensions or renewals of contracts and grants.

Copies of this report will go to each department engaged in
contract research and to the Bushinss Office.

Cordially yours,



L. E. Grinter
Director of Research

Enclosure


















OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH

Analysis of Sources of Rescarch Contract and Grant Funds June 30, 1960


CateGories of Sponsors


Supported by Department of Defense ............. . .
Supported by other Federal, State, or Local Government . .
Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or Societics . . .
supported by industry or Industrial Associations . . .


Amount

$ 1,953,C06.82
2,443,864.00
386,650.00
457,152.75


Total face value of contracts in force . $ 5,241,481.57
Face value divided by years in force . ... 3,179,389.23
Research backlog or une:-pired value of contracts
in force as of June 30, 1960 . .. 1,868,710.25


University Breakdown

Agriculture and Forestry ....
Arts and Sciences .
Engineering . ..
iMedicine . .
Pharmacy . .
Other . .


97.5
44
51
62.5
6

274


Face Value

$ 528,391.00
914,049.00
2,2L3,075.25
1,041,457.32
03,544.00
390,965.00
5,241,481.57


No. New Grants and Contracts


27.5
12

4.5
1
6
59


$ 100,670.00
276,994.00
207,229.00
97,444.oo
9,L90.00
132,086.00
832,315.00


No. Extensions or Renewals

24 $ 131,630.00
6 CL,452.o0
11 144,943.00
15 230,365.00
3 46,514.00
9 637,912.00
59 637,912.00


CateCories of Service Performed


Direct Probable Benefit to Industry . . .
Contribution to Human Health . .. .
Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture and Forestry . .
Contribution to the national Safety (Defense) . .
Basic Research and Educational Contracts . .


Amount*

$ 2,121,280.75
1,418,335.32
507,648.00
1,404,701.50
4,205,385.57


*M.1any projects contribute to more than one service objective, hence any total of this group would be meaningless.


Percentage

37.20
46.62
7.38
8.72


Percentage*

40.47
27.06
9.69
26.8o
00.23








UNIVEIPS Y OF jLOPJDA
Gaiae avilsl


T'.e Grad ute Sehic. January 8, 1960
Office of the Dean







Dro J, Wayna Reltz, Prezsident
University of Florida
2S6 Admitistration Building
camps

Dear Dr. Reitz:

I am enclesing a coary of the Semiaenmal. Report Resoeareb
Contracts and Grats current in My office as of December 31, 1959.

The tofal face valate of the contr~ract and grants listed es
$V,598.263. 54 A very rouh estimate of theb annual r.te ;s ean:-
puted by dividltg the face vaue of each co ftra.ct by 'the years in
fsrce, fnal-h was determined asn f December 31, 1959 't) be
$2,835,.~676, 77, The summary analysis also incliite an itea cauled
Rsearcih B'ackl~;, This is aI estLimae of the ~mexpn.i2i vil', of
contracts as of December 31, 1959 aud it is ccmputed :' 'cm the faci.
value divided by the years in force and munl;3pl.td by the un.expir..d
period.

As in the last previous report -this semiannual sanmary taclau!. s
total L~-motnts recei'med for n contracts and grants aid the amcimt.;
received due to extensions or renewals of contracts a-id grants
This eopli.ins thge.are dc.op in face value :~f toc.al contracts v ;-.e
the an.tai.l Urate and the research backing have remainael reasC:cabLy
eonstait.

Copies of this report will g, to each department erguged i1
contract research and to the Busirese Office.

Cordially yiors,


cC;V' At?'^^^
L. E, Grinter
Director of Res,;arch

Enelosure




















Categories of Sponsors


OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH

Analysis of Sources of Research Contract and Grant Funds December 31, 1959


Amount


Supported by Department of Defense . . .
Supported by other Federal, State, or Local Government . .
Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or Societies . .
Supported by Industry or Industrial Associations ............


$ 1,901,983.50
2,03.9, .00.00
297,668.33
379,511.71


Total face value of contracts in force . .
Face value divided by years in force . .
Research backlog or unexpired value of contracts
in force as of December 31, 1959 . .


$ 4,598,263.54
2,835,476.77

1,816,340.08


University Breakdown

Agriculture and Forestry .
Arts and Sciences .
Engineering .. ....
Medicine . .
Pha1 nicy .
Statistical Laboratory .
Other


No. Face Value

91 $ J64,2):2.33
39 659,002.00
47 2,152,C95.10
56 900,709.00
7 104,102.00
2 74,352.11
8 24g2.96l.o
250 4,598,263.54


No. New Grants and Contracts

34 $ 177,454.00
9 145,565.00
11 450,080.75
13 224,458.00

1 25,952.11
2 41 50o.00
70 1,065,O0C.86


No. Extensions or Renewals

11 $ 62,837.00
11 112,710.00.
9 163,085.00
21 294,459.00
2 14,375.00

S22,500.00
55 59i,966.O0


Categories of Service Performed

Direct Probable Benefit to Industry . . .
Coantributioni to H l7an Health ..... ... ... ....
Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture and Forestry . .
Contribution to the National Safety (Defense) . ...
Basic Research and Educational Contracts ................


A.nount.

$ 2,091,654.04
1,233,341.00
470,046.00
1,485,635.50
3,474,060.43


*any projects contribute to more than one service objective, hence any total of this group would be meaningless.


Percentage

41.36
43.91
6.48
8.25


Percentage*

45.49
26.83
10.22
32.30
75.55







University of Florida
The Graduate School Gainesville July 15, 1959
Office of the Dean



Dr. J. Wayne Reitz, President
University of Florida
226 Administration Building
Campus

Dear Dr. Reitz:

I am enclosing a copy of the Semiannual Report on Re-
search Contracts and Grants current in my office as of
June 30, 1959.

The total face value of the contracts and grants listed is
$5, 520e 535, 36.- A very rough estirnat of the annual rate is
computed by dividing the ftce value of each contract by the
years in force, which was determined as of June 30, 1959,
to be $2, 907, 707, 93. 'The summary analyaiaf also includes
an item called Research Backlog. This is an estimate of the
unexpired value of contracts as of June 30, 1959, and it is
computed from the face value divided by the years in force
and multiplied by the unexpired period,

Beginning with.this current semiannual summary total
amounts received for new contracts and grants and the amounts
received due to extensions or renewals of contracts and grants
is also listed with the number of contracts involved in each
category.

Copies of this report will go to each department engaged
in contract research and to the Business Office.

Cordially yours,


L. E. Grinter
Director of Research

Enclosure


10-
















OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEAIC.

Analysis of Sources of Research Contract and Grant Funds Ju;, 30, 1959


Categories of Sponsors
Supported by Department of Defense . .
Supported by other Federal, State, or Local Government .
Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or Societies .. .
Supported by Industry.or Industrial Associations . .


Amount
$ 3, 124, 596. 50
1,718,874. 8
224, 851.33
452,212.85


Total face value of contracts in force ..... .
Face value divided by years in force .. .
Research backlog or unexpired value of contracts in force
as of June 30, 1959 ... ...................


$ 5, 520, 535. 36
2,907,707.93

1,422,546.45


University Breakdown

Agriculture and Forestry. ...
Arts and Sciences ..
Engineering .....
Medicine . ....
Pharmacy (Cancer Research)..
Statistical Laboratory .. ...
Other (includes all units reporting
less than $25, 000. 00) .


Face Value

$ 405,810.01
680, 856. 00
3, 327,239.35
790, 608. 00
126, 377. 00
64, 405.00


7 125,240.00
243 $ 5, 520, 535. 36


New Grants and Contracts No. Extensions or Renewals


27
12
18
10
2
0

2
71


Categories of Service Performed

Direct Probable Benefit to Industry .. .
Contribution to Human Health . ..
Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture and Forestry .
Contribution to the National Safety (Defense) .. .
Basic Research and Educational Contracts .. .


$ 111,587.00
145, 057. 00
394,827. 85
145, 882. 00
23, 300. 00


2, 800.00
$ 823, 45,3. 85
Amount *

$ 3,400,219.18
1, 126, 696. 00
432, 122. 00
2,254,011.50
3, 085, 743. 36


0
-35.


$. 59,623. 33
83, 199. 00
143, 981.50
93,816.00
75, 362. 00
10, 000. 00


$ 465,981.83
Percentage *

61.59
20. 41
7.83
40. 83
55. 90.


* Many projects contribute to more than one service objective, hence any total of this group would be meaningless.


Percentage
56. 55
31.19
4.07
8.19


..










UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
Gainesville, Florida

The Graduate School January 15. 1959
Office of the Dean



Dr. J. Wayne Reitz, President
University of Florida
226 Administration Building
Campus

Dear Dr. Reitz:

I am enclosing a copy of the Semiannual Report on
Research Contracts and Grants current in my office
as of December 31, 1958.

Although the total face value of the contracts and
grants listed is $4, 753, 251. 28, the annual rate, comr
puted by dividing the face value of each contract by the
years in force, was determined as of December 31 to
be $2, 377, 036. 64. The summary analysis also includes
an item called Research Backlog. This is an estimate
of the unexpired value of contracts as of Decerrb er 31,
1958, and it is computed from the face value divided by
years in force and multiplied by the unexpired period.

Copies of this report will go to each department
engaged in contract research and to the Business Office.

Cordially yours,


E. Printer
Director of Research

Enclosure






t q


OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH


I* : 13


December 31, 1958

Analysis of Sources of Research Contract and Grant Funds


Categories of Sponsors


Amount


Percentage


Supported by Department of Defense .
Supported by other Federal, State, or Local
Government . .
Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or
Societies .
Supported by Industry or Industrial
Associations . .

Total face value of contracts in force .
Face value divided by years in force .
Research backlog or unexpired value of
contracts in force as of Dec. 31, 1958 ...

University Breakdown


Agriculture and Forestry
Arts and Sciences .
Business Administration .
Cancer Research .
Education ..
Engineering .
Health Related Services
Medicine .
Museum ... .
Statistical Laboratory .
Other ........


* S
q *
* *. .


. .


S
** *


$ 2, 737, 177. 00

1,411,679.68

193, 680. 00

410, 714. 60

4, 753, 251. 28
2, 377, 036. 64

1, 527, 477. 82


. $ 351,419.28
. 533, 562. 00
S. 4, 100. 00
. 85,166.00
34,130,00
S. 2, 944,254.00
. 12, 540. 00
622, 019. 00
S. 26,800. 00
54,261.00
85,000.00
$4, 753, 251.28


Categories of Service Performed


Direct Probable Benefit to Industry .
Contribution to Human Health. .
Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture and
Forestry . .
Contribution to the National Safety (Defense) .
Basic Research and Educational Contracts. .


3, 128, 581.
906,625.


362, 406.
2, 487, 126.
2, 420, 387.


* No Total

* Many projects contribute to more than one service objective, hence
a total of this group would be meaningless


57. 59

29.69

4.08

8.64


No.
71
37
1
7
1
70
1
42
3
12
2
247


65. 82
19. 07

7.62
52. 32
50. 92




























---APPED3IX



Out-of.Town Meetings Regarding Reaearch

Contributions to Deprtimenta for Library Purchases

Contributions to Departments for Research
Equipcint

Contributions to Departments for Special Items
of a Permaent Nature








Out-of-Town meetings Regarding Research


September 19, 1958: Meeting with Dr. Jesse Hobson, Research Director,
United Fruit Co., regarding projects in Tropical Research for
cooperative activity, Boston, Mass.

September 20 and 23, 1958: Meetings with Henry Heald, Mr. Carroll,
Mr. 1McPeak and Dr. Borgmann regarding projects at the University of
Florida financed by the Ford Foundation, New York City, N. Y.

Noveaiber 17, 1958: Report of Advisory Coimittees on Ship Structure
Research. Served as Chairman of Ship Structural Design Committee,
Washington, D. C.

January 23, 1959: Research Planning at Stevens Institute of Technology,
Maritime Research Advisory Committee of the National Research
Council, Hoboken, N. J.

February 13-15, 1959: Meeting on tropical research problems, United
Fruit Co., La Lima, Honduras.

May 21, 1959: Annual Report Meeting, Ship Structure Committee, Washington,
D. C. Dean Grinter also visited the National Science Foundation
and had conferences with Dr. Roy Seeger, Deputy Director, Physical
Sciences; Dr. W. R. Kiner, Chemistry; Dr. J. H. McMillen, Physics;
Dr. K. G. Picha, Engineering; Dr. Thomas D. Fontaine, Fellowships;
and Dean Boyd, Fellowships.

June 14-15, 1959: Inspection of research facilities and organization,
Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.

December 3-4, 1959: Panel on research training at the Ph.D. level,
Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, Mass,

April 5, 1960: Discussions regarding sponsorship of Nuclear Science
Building at the University of Florida, and the nuclear accelerator and
giant computer, National Science Foundation, Washington, D. C.

May 9, 1960: Annual meeting of Column Research Council, New York City,
N. Y.



^ -' \ f.,





























APP~IfIDX



Out-Of-Town Meeti ns Rarding Research

Contributions to Depairtments for Librarxy Purchases

Contributions to Departments for floveprch
Equipunt

Contributlons to flepnrtmnts ifor speciall Items
of a Permanent Nature











V .


Contributions to Demartments for Libr Prchaae
rom Rieoearich Funds, 195 3-60


Departaennt of Architectuz 685.75

Department of Art 2,08a.70

Department of Biology 1:,378.58

Department of English 817.00

Department of History 297.00

Departments of History and Political Science 1,765.00

Department of Political Science 1,000.00

University Libraries 3,1191.25

Eleven Departments 4275

Total 12,360.03 *


SThis is in addition to $9,000.00 expended by the Graduate Council.








Cot~ributiona to Demprtments for RSeoarch Ectibnt
195,3-6O


Department

Department

Department

Department

Department
Department

Department.

Department

Department
Department

Department

Department

Department

Department

Department


Departmaat

Department

Department
Doprmet


AnsaIl VSSZa~rr

Bacteriolog

BioTlo y

Bota~

Chemical Zmgaeering

Chemistry

Civil Engineerring

Electrical Engainering

Engineering Fehancuca

Entamology

Fruit CrOps

Geograpby

Geology

eechanbeal Enginerzng

Philosorar

Pbysees

Plant Pathiology

Political Science

Psychology

Sociology and Anthropology

Veterinary Scsence


* 3,280.00
2,800,00

8,6630oo

3,091.90
800.00

22,790.00

635.00

6,600.00

1,000.00

6,759.80

502.00

919.00

o0.0oo

590.00

375.00

86,226.00

550.00

250.00

2,235.00

2,135.00

2,763.00


17







1l8


Contributions for Research EMuiPrnt, (co"tIM04)


0-2 Dcpeprtment 2
Co13*ge of Education 1,#30.40

C03-Ug. or M*Awerlng (If wesrium Services) 1,295.00
C001e e of fta=Wy 375.00
Plorida State YIuWeim 2,650.00
University Libraries 140o00


TOTAL


$93,627.60









Contributions to Demartments for Snecial Items of a
Permanent Nature, 195L-60


Department of Art

Department of Biology

Department of History

Department of Political Science

Department of Sociology and
Anthropology

Department of Speech


Total


70,00

700.25

223.70

200.00

1,250.00


135.00

$ 2,578.95










-: Summer Research Appo4ntmento, 1960


By action of the Research Council and approval by the

President, the folloItg faculty appointments for research

during the su~ er of 1960 were approved. Each Wiividual vas

appointed for a two-lonth period at the regular semmar rate as

a teacher. It ls believed that each of these appointments vill

result eventually in a significant research or scholarly publi-

cation. The appointments for 1960 were for the following

individuals:

Dr. I. A. Payne C-1 Departmcnt
Prof. H. W. Covingtoa Art Departnent
Dr. R. B. Vovles ~nslish Department
Dr. R. G. Downing Political Science Department
Dr. O. .varlien Political Science Department
Dr. A. A. Broyles Physics r-partment
Dr. B. NI. Dumncll P sychoAloy Depaitent
Dr. J. N. Layne Biolo=y Depart=ent
Dr. G. 3. ischkewitsch Cb=mistrj Departmnt
Dr. P E. oofo. Economics Department


Alternates


Prof. H. H. Holbrook
Dr. W, O. Weyrauch
Dr. A. 1- Sievers


Art Departmant
Law Collese
Economics Department


5










UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
GAINESVILLE


THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OFFICE OP THE DEAN


July 30O 1962


Drf J* Wayne Raits
President
226 Tligrt lie
Caump

D.ao De. Rfeitst


Attshed hbewith ae
the Bieniall Report of the
the period 19608-2.


the original and two copies ao
Offltc of Contract Reearch for


Sianerely years,



L. E. Qrinter
Director of Research


LZ/ag









Report at the Diretor oa Researok, 1"9042 limenmi
L, E. Orlater


The voeine fa reeareh at the Universlty oa Floridz ha bs Pgr

steadily ovr the 1960.42 bienaimi. The faoe vale of street research

and research pamts from uteide saoesur e presented $4,59,2,8.54 on

Juamey 1, 19i0 and bad increased to $7,181,567.95 two years lator

Correspedingly the estimated aeual rat of expenditure had iwureased

from $2,088,7s,77 at the begimaing of the bienitum to $41388",08896

two yoear latrO a irea so of 56 per cent. It ia mueh aer diffi-

cult to estimate the overall uaivesity expedituem for mseaMrr The

latest fige s ailablo is for the yuar 19M9-60 for which the grand

total was $10,743,207. oubtless this fiawe too has i wased greatly

durita the bisnmima.

adesntal iea>raor -The 15O-42 bieaeiw saw a oeatiaUina

inJame. L the properties at speosored resear of a beasi or fhma-

Maetal at m This asy be meeused by the inoeased pesroatag of

spoamoship fuhro hed by such fundamatal research aglales as the

Katimal Soleoo Frowsdtioa, the Mational Inatitute of Health and the

private fudatiaems. Fellevag this type of alynsis it i* estimated

that eer 90 per Met of the spoesord reem rob is of a fuadmental

natres. Naturally the iMrease in perentage of basio remseapo has

bee aessmpmted by a desaree am the pero sot t f resaMeh spounsoed

by the Depatment of Defeamw tndstrial support hba rersuad theirr

steady at eboat six per mat of the total olaw of sponsored reeaob.











Geroth of R arh by ooflle --The figures for research growth

of individual collages over a five-year period are interesting and

probably sigaificant for the future. from June 19S6 to Juae 1961 the

face value of sponsored research eootrets and grants in Agriculture

and roretry icreasn d froe $415,348 to $542,742, an increase of about

30 per cast. Over this period the College of Arts and Sieneaas increased

its spomeored research frte $275,SS4 to $1,535,092 or 550 per ant.

During the same five years the face value of Cngianeraig seatrasts and

grants reduced from $2,588,890 to $2,242,467, a losa of 13 per cet.

The figures for the College of Nedicine show an incroaa from $83,699

to $1,277,402 which would have little meaning if pressed aU a

percentage increase. However, ame can readily correlate the selective

policy of aoruitnat so noticeable in the College of Mediiane with this

very sharp increase in sponsored research. The volume of research

sponsorship is directly dependent upon the research productivity of

the staff as aasured by publicatioas and by research reputation for

thaoe areas of scholarship whor research fund are readily available

through outside agencies.

Other Measure of Research StrEMgtbh-One measure of research

quality is the number of postdoctoral research fellows attending an

institution because the postdoetral fellow can usually select the

institutieo that he desires to attend. In 1959 only one postdostoral

research fellow was studying at the University of Florida* In 1961-62

27 postdoetoral research fellow were enrolled although only a sitagl











peotdoseteal fellowship was bIdgted from state funds through the

Graduate Shool, Another sigptfieast development has been that of

smme r oeseah appeinstmts for faculty. Tea have beer made avail-

able eash same of the biennium 1960"2. Thee appoistuents have

in essentilly all cases resulted ia Imesurable schieveuents through

publications. FPally, the appoiatmaet of eight nationally dis-

tingushed graduate veseavch professorships in eight depaurtlmts of

the Unversity within the pat two bieania is a further iadleation

that the University of Florida is maturing as a research Iestitati o.

This say be further substantiated by the research publeiation record

of several epartmsts. As One example, the Departmsnt of Chemistry

lneassed its siettific publication over the past five years from

20 to 6S aaually.

rautelr V!eonm of ,b--*It 1i possible to plot and then pro-

jeot into future years One signifoiomt factor in researe growth, that

is, the volume of resereh contaets and grets. Three types of extrapo-

lation awe idiated on the attuaced graph (Figure 1). The lest lUae

i sa extrepolatla based upon the past rate of groet of eeatraots

and grants at the University of Florida, It shows iam scrs free an

ammal rate of 3.0 millie. dellae in 1960 to 4.6 millite by 1965 aid

to 7.6 million in 1975. Ho ver, if the Univerity of Florida should

increase its growth rate with maturity to the 1957-59 growth rate of

Purdue Uairlrity, the 1975 volue of sponsored resoaroh ld be

expected to reach 10.6 milliu dollars or an increase of 0 per oent










Income for research from
contracts and grants
Total organized research
expenditures -


/U. of Illinois


U. of Illinois


1948 1950 1952 1954 1956 1958 1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1975

Years


Fig. 1.--Research income for University of Florida from
1975 by growth curves of the past decade.


contracts and grants projected to











above the first projecJtiL. Based upeo the growth rate at the

University of ZIllnois the 197S volume of sposored research at the

University of Florida woud reach 16.9 mUllian dollars annually or

220 per cnt above the first projctiaon. Perhaps it is too meh

to expect the roadblocks to reseaob growth that have existed in

Florida to be removed in time to aehleve the rapid rate of research

growth of the University of Illlsois, but the Purdue Uiversity

growth rate could certainly be attained. The result would be very

signitfia t to the econaos industrial and cultural growth of Tlorida.

PuMrpos of a ResMearhb oTadati e.-The coordinatioa of sponsored

research at the University of Florida has been limited to the attention

possible through about fifteen per cent of the titm of the Dean of the

Graduate Shool assisted by one elerial employ-ee The asmual expeadi-

tuwe is below 10,000 dollar for this effort. Obviuslyt a 7,000,000

dollar spmsoed research program vuld be expected to require per-

haps ta times the present expenditure for coordiaatiLo. As a matter

of fact an lareeased expenditure would be recovered largely by

iaereased overhead on contrasts e d grants. However, the oeerdiaatioa

needed canmot be achieved saless a different adaainstrativo orglisa-

tion is arranged The typical if not universal instrument for unver-

sity research eosrc dintate is the Rsaeareh orundatirn or Research

Inasttute.

The essential ftactimns of a Research Foundattl may be summarise

as follows.









1. Provide aid to faulty members to aeotaot appropriate agaay

sponsored of research. Pay travel of feoalty to Washingto or elsewhere

for this purpose. ake monthly oetasta in Washingten by the director

or his asseetates to mmitainu the latest information regarding avil.

able support for research Similar oontats would be ma4e with fouwadtiles

and mWy erpostiams that re direct sponsors of research. initiate

resear b coatsts in Florida.

2. Provide the femwlty with aid ia preparing rmesarh reports

ineludig steoagraphic, drafting, report editing, photegrphiie and

depUolitiom services. HIatlta legal, atceatLang, translation amd

patent applisation s rvies.

3. Develp 0d operate a revolving f md for initiatLag research

that gives premise of attracting sponsorship. riMan prelimlary

library search Such seed sor has prowed to be extremely useftt

aad pedtetive of sponsaowhip.

4. Uee its revolving fund to provide stability of research

activity by carrying research sts for short peri od that somtime

ocur between completion of one asstraet or grant and approval of

another. Such stability will o ourag more research work paid for

by euawida sponsors at aO aoat to the state of Floridas

5. Naiataia certain special technical services e eh as glass*

blawiag and MeletroLe instrM nt repair and operate large oxpensiva

instrNmMets vbieh aamnot be provided by evary department needing suh

oresarc sIrvioes A Research Foundation meldA greatly reduce the

aoet to the University of ele treama eamputer ser"ia for sample.










6, Provide o-empus authority to approve research contrects

and greats. Prsetly the laagth of time required is afta six veeks

which has bee inereasiag rather than deereasing. Twuty-four hour

approval as the cmpus la needed ad will greatly stimulat the

voUmm of spesewred reisare. No other mjoer aiveraity has been

fiMad to be handicapped to this extent.

Tye of Research roU dation NWeded,-In order to achieve the

essential objective listed above it will be ecesary to iacerporate

a private mwsearch fautdastie or institute that doie not fuwctica as

a puat of the state government Such a foundation would be able to

develop the necessary revolving fund of at lest a ailime dollars

from iadiUeat ost barges. It could determine the legality of a

aotraet atd provide an immediate decision as to aeoptability. It

should not develop a research staff in eomptitio with University

depaertats but should bchenl all research to departments through a

eiagle agreement with the Unive ity and the board of Control. Its

staff would tkhrfore be limited to coordinating ad sarvieo posmmal,

and its physical plant would be limited to administrative offlos slang

with service shops, laboratories and eoaptors to aid department in

the emduot of rosearah, taMds colected in exess of its needs for

the objetive listed should be chaaneled through the Gredate School

for support of scholarship and researa in all departments of the

University. It is oofidettly believed that the developeat of such

a research foundatioBn wald lerease the rate of growth ef sponsored










eearah tfri the rate indicated by the lower dotted line to at

loat the irtendiate dotted lIne in the accompanying illutration.

Putuwe of search at the Uiversity of Floral -Th* state of

Florida maot grow into oma ef the too most populous states without

providiLg andatrial payrolls for its increased populaties. The

example of Califernia i very ol* r in thi regard. Recent develop-

mites in Florida have clarified the fact that ommeroe and industry

are str agy attracted to state that have prodded distinguished

universities whether public or private. Even tbh Fedeal earmnment

has mado advanced eduetiemal opportunities a prime requisite for

leoatimo of aow research labmratories This mans, of course,

oasoable proximity to baealaBrete edaiation but even meo

si ifiteat is the availability within the state of research teams,

graduate students and doeteral study. These opportunities have

never been *ueooally spread over a large state. Instead, they

af usually oeaeantrated at wMe state iistitutio. Even a state

as large and wealthy as Califtorsi has beem unable to achieve edaea-

tinsel distintiLon in mor tha two geograpbioal locations. Hmee

it weld be iLse for industry to urg the political forces is Flerida

to rlteve the University of Florida of those restrietims that

iaflmme matavorably the growth of researh and graedate study so as

to givl it every opportunity to nreae the state of developent and

edueatioaal distiaotioe required by me of the ten moat populasi and

prosperom industrial states to 1970-7S.










UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
Gainesville

The Graduate School January 8, 1960
Office of the Dean





Dr. J. Wayne Reitz, President
University of Florida
226 Administration Building
Campus

Dear Dr. Reitz:

I am enclosing a copy of the Semiannual Report on Research
Contracts and Grants current in my office as of December 31, 1959.

The total face value of the contracts and grants listed is
$4,598,263.54. A very rough estimate of the annual rate is com-
puted by dividing the face value of each contract by the years in
force, which was determined as of December 31, 1959 to be
$2,835,476.77. The summary analysis also includes an item called
Research Backlog. This is an estimate of the unexpired value of
contracts as of December 31, 1959 and it is computed from the face
value divided by the years in force and multiplied by the unexpired
period.

As in the last previous report this semiannual summary includes
total amounts received for new contracts and grants and the amounts
received due to extensions or renewals of contracts and grants.
This explains the large drop in face value of total contracts while
the annual rate and the research backlog have remained reasonably
constant.

Copies of this report will go to each department engaged in
contract research and to the Business Office.

Cordially yours,



L. E. Grinter
Director of Research


Enclosure

















OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH

Analysis of Sources of Research Contract and Grant Funds December 31, 1959


Categories of Sponsors


Amount


Supported by Department of Defense . .... .... $. 1,901,983.50
Supported by other Federal, State, or Local Government .... 2,019,100.00
Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or Societies . .. 297,668.33
Supported by Industry or Industrial Associations . .... .379,511.71

Total face value of contracts in force .... $ 4,598,263.54
'Face value divided by years in force .. . 2,835,476.77
Research backlog or unexpired value of contracts
in force as of December 31, 1959 . .. 1,816,340.08


University Breakdown

Agriculture and Forestry .
Arts and Sciences .
Engineering . .
Medicine . .
Pharmacy . .
Statistical Laboratory .
Other


No. Face Value

91 $ 464,242.33
39 659,002.00
47 2,152,895.10
56 900,709.00
7 104,102.00
2 74,352.11
8 242,961.00
250 4,598,263.54


Categories of Service Performed


Direct Probable Benefit to Industry . .
Contribution to Human Health . .
'Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture and Forestry .
Contribution to the National Safety (Defense) .
Basic Research and Educational Contracts . .


No. New Grants and Contracts

34 $ 177,454.00
9 145,565.00
11 450,080.75
13 224,458.00

1 25,952.11
2 41,500.00
70 1,065,009.86

Amount*

. $ 2,091,654.04
. .. 1,233,341.00
. .' 470,046.00
. .. 1,485,635.50
. .. 3,474,060.43


No. Extensions or Renewals

11 $ 62,837.00
11 112,710.00
9 163,085.00
21 294,459.00
2 14,375.00

1 22,500.00
55 669,966.00


Percentage*

S45.49
26.83
10.22
32.30
75.55


*Many projects contribute to more than one service objective, hence any total of this group would be meaningless.


Percentage

41.36
43.91
6.48
8.25











UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
Gainesville


The Graduate School January 20, 1961
Office of the Dean









Dr. J. Wayne Reitz, President
University of Florida
226 Tigert Hall
Campus

Dear Dr. Reitz:

I am enclosing a copy of the Semiannual Report on Research
Contracts and Grants current in my office as of December 31,
1960.

The total face value of the contracts and grants listed
is $5,074,389.60. A very rough estimate of the annual rate is
computed by dividing the face value of each contract by the
years in force, which was determined as of December 31, 1960
to be $3,101,628.01. The summary analysis also includes an
item called Research Backlog. This is an estimate of the
unexpired value of contracts as of December 31, 1960 and it
is computed from the face value divided by the years in force
and multiplied by the unexpired period.

As in the last previous report this semiannual summary
includes total amounts received for new contracts and grants
and the amount received due to extensions or renewals of con-
tracts and grants.

Copies of this report will go to each department engaged
in contract research and to the Business Office.

Cordially yours,



L. E. Grinter
Director of Research


Enclosure
















OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH

Analysis of Sources of Research Contract and Grant Funds December 31, 1960


Amount


Supported by Department of Defense . . . $
Supported by other Federal, State, or Local Government . . .
Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or Societies . . .
Supported by Industry or Industrial Associations . . .


University Breakdown

Agriculture and Forestry .
Arts and Sciences . .
Business Administration .
Education .. ....
Engineering . .
Medicine .
Pharmacy . .
Other . .


Total face value of contracts in force
Face value divided by years in force
Research backlog or unexpired value of
in force as of December 31, 1960

No. Face Value No.


89.5
46.5
4
3
49.5
61.5
4

265


$ 512,747.00
1,113,606.62
65,000.00
84,263.00
2,000,309.66
1,070,062.32
70,360.00
157,961.00
5,074,389.60


23
9.5
1
U-5
11.5
12

60
6o


1,670,808.94
2,507,397.00
426,651.00
469,532.66


. . $

contracts


New Grants and Contracts

$ 69,641.00
210,205.62
1,000.00

194,573.00
212,897.00

38,700.00
727,016.62


Percentage

32.93
49.41
8.41
9.25


5,074,389.60
3,101,628.01

2,022,481.16

No. Extensions or Renewals

17 $ 112,854.00
11 114,496.00
1 9,500.00

10 350,541.91
26 363,799.00
2 28,388.00
1 25,000.00
68 1,004,578.91


Categories of Service Performed

Direct Probable Benefit to Industry . .
Contribution to Human Health . ......
Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture and Forestry .
Contribution to the National Safety (Defense) ........
Basic Research and Educational Contracts . .


Amount*

$ 1,744,712.75
1,454,009.32
477,428.91
1,061,214.62
4,555,230.60


*Many projects contribute to more than one service objective, hence any total of this group would be meaningless.


Categories of Sponsors


Percentage

34.38
28.65
9.41
20.91
89.77















UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
Gainesville


The Graduate School
Office of the Dean January 17, 1962









Dr. J. Wayne Reitz, President
University of Florida
226 Tigert Hall
Campus

Dear Dr. Reitz:

I am enclosing a copy of the Semiannual Report on Research
Contracts and Grants current in my office as of December 31,
1961.

The total face value of the contracts and grants listed
is $7,204,732.95. A very rough estimate of the annual rate
is computed by dividing the face value of each contract by the
years in force, -.hich was determined as of December 31, 1961
to be $4,388,689.86. The summary analysis also includes an
item called Research Backlog. This is an estimate of the un-
expired value of contracts as of December 31, 1961 and it is
computed from the face value divided by the years in force and
multiplied by the unexpired period. It had increased to
$3,110,172.93 as of December 31, 1961.

As in the last previous report this semiannual summary
includes total amounts received for new contracts and grants
and the amount received due to extensions or renewals of
contracts and grants.

Copies of this report will go to each department engaged
in contract research and to the Business Office.

Cordially yours,


Drc 6.r o 'fRse
L. E. Grinter
Director of Research


Enclosure















OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH


Analysis of Sources of Research Contract and Grant Funds--December 31, 1961

Categories of Sponsors Amount


Supported by Department of Defense . . $
Supported by other Federal, State, or Local Government . .
Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or Societies . ..
Supported by Industry or Industrial Associations . .


Total face value of contracts in force . .
Face value divided by years in force . .
Research backlog or unexpired value of contracts
in force as of December 31, 1961 . .


2,356,892.94
3,868,143.09
546,432.32
410,399.60


Percentage

32.82
53.86
7.61
5.71


$7,204,732.95
4,388,689.86

3,110,172.93


University Breakdoxm

Agriculture and Forestry
Arts and Sciences
Business Administration
Education
Engineering
Medicine
Pharmacy
Statistical Laboratory
Other


Face Value

$ 671,772.13
1,709,209.62
52,000.00
137,269.00
2,698,801.00
1,472,045.64
42,107.00
203,285.56
195,378.00

$7,204,732.95


No. New Contracts and Grants

25 $164,167.13
12 224,934.00

1 54,490.00
14 220,331.00
14 274,400.32
1 3,000.00
2 203,285.56
1 11,525.00

70 $1,156,133.01


No. Extensions or Renewals

24 $186,949.00
9 122,649.00

1 1,725.00
12 525,524.00
28 384,957.00
1 15,180.00

2 87,975.00

77 $1,324,959.00


Categories of Services Performed

Direct Probable Benefit to Industry .
Contribution to Human Health . .
Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture and Forestry.
Contribution to the National Safety (Defense) .
Basic Research and Educational Contracts .


Amount*

$2,427,338.06
1,686,123.64
833,633.04
1,717,087.62
6,688,085.07


*Many projects contribute to more than one service objective, hence any total of these groups would be meaningless.


Percentage*

33.69
23.40
11.57
23.83
92.80










Summer Research Appointmenta


by action of the Research Council and approval by the

President, the following faculty appointments for research during

the sumrors of 1061 and 1962 wore approved* Each individual was

appointed for a two-month period at therregular sunmer rate as a

teacher. It is believed that each of those appointments will

result eventually in a significant research or scholarly publica-

tion. The appointments wera for the following individuals:

1961 Summer Soesion

F. N. Blanchard Geology
R, L. Danburg Music
E. A. iliamond Social Sciences
F. H, Hartmann Political Science
F. C, Hayes Foreign Languages
L. D. Kier Pharmaceutical Chemistry
L. C. Kirkland English
Honryk Minc Mathematics
R, D. Mitchell Biology
C. E, Reid Chemistry

1952 Summer Session

Thomas Blosso Huluanities
R. H. Bowers English
D. M. Chalmers Social Sciences
i, J. Doherty Social Scienoes
F, E. Dunnam Physics
R. F. Farnen Social Sciences
Samuel Proctor Social Sciences
A. H. Sievors Economics
A. W. Thompson History




















APFUD1X



fotto WD'Tom N.tLas. Ifgewrdtm hwr.nl

CwtvibvtLmsmm to Dpttusuts turn' fwA avs
Eqadpmat

cmstributiom to Dvpamwtuwt f Lfborry
prohas"











Outet*Tw fWem-tiaAg Plgarui .g RseeUeh


SepmnbOr 0, 16 IO VisLted 111 Corporatie, Insbeston, New York,
to disU e *eleetre at empltes and thewi use.

May 10, 1961 Neetoia at the Ferd FTamdaties to disease sateets
ragading futwu pgro~ m Mwe Yerk City.

July 14-ZU, 9l1s Attefaed metig of trh rUlwid Developmat
Commisein, Napls, Flriwda, to Udisas rwessh ind
eduatioem Talk given at a )amehemn, attended by GQove r
Iryast, on July 15I

Febumuay 26, l2f MNoetnag at the National Searae FaradatiL of
the Ad-Ree Plemning Comfenor e ar Senior Frreig SeLtetist
Felloship Pogram, Was ngt.m, D. C.

uMre 28-29, 192 Vtiits to Sieas Maapmewr Csoais ais, Natieral
Silence Foundatien, U. S. Offiee of Id4ation, and the
National AsMramtl ui d Sppel Adalnistraties ian Vashiate,
b. C., to dismea fellowshipesr, qseiarmm projectsts eqip t
ynjests for physics, dheuistr, arthematiaes engimeem g,
anelea~ and opace a tivities.

Nay 8, 19621 NMiting of the later-Institutonal Committee t Nualear
Siaenae and osear~b, Tallahass, rFloida.

MHy 29-30, 19621 Trip to Cape Coral, Flride, to ltupeot site 6f
proposed Univrsity of Florida Marine Biology Station, in
Ma~ujamtio with visit from emeultants La arin Biology
called ia to roeemend a site for sush a static.









Cantribut LaM to D mat tst for Rearach Euipmnt
1960402


Departmat of Agreoamy

Departmat et AnImal Sci.em

Depwrtmant of Anthropology

beprtmst of IBaterioloy 3,1

BDpartment of act~ biology mad Botay 5,0
(Joint contributCm)

Departmet of Bology 3,


99.00

169.00

18.00





060r00


Departeaat



spwrtmmt

Department

Department

Departmuat

Department







Departaat
Depatm


Dvpwtuswt

D^Mtlwat

Departmeut

D.epw"Mmt
Deputmat

DIpahrt


Beteay

Ch-mical nEgiseariag

Cbhiastry

Civil cnginlringl

Electrical Engineriag

Eaginmrfsg M)ehaaisi

Eaglimh

Entomology

Faorign Lmaaumage

Fmwedatioam of Edueatia

Geography

Qeology

History

etallurgy

Omammtal HMrtisatuare

Physio

Plant Pathology


4.031.81

475.00

13,13t4.84

2,965,00

1,82500

5,670.00

119.95

5,610,00

5MO.OO
95.00

400,00





614.90

1,115.00



7,268.00

1,S00,00











coAtylbgtioGs for f t.9h L.4IPk uat (*antitAd)


Depuatmt oe Ptbarw y

DepaWrt"t e Poltlci Seiaae

Departem t of fPyohele

Departet of Sosl.ys
Departmt of Selal

Deputmot otf SpOLhI

C-2 Department

C- Deipartmsat

Department of Amdio-visual Eduwstloa

Juiaer College S8ots* Edweatics Progmin

CoUllegI et Law

College of Physt el duaat4 n mad Msalth

Bumes of 2Iccnese and tusinew Rieesau

nXorid Stat~ Mhumn

Libry

P0MtMpM- eSpeaRsh Lasguap m d Area Center

Caotriutica for ph P a ofaputer


$ 1,26ll 00

287.50

4,800,00

2,429S00

2,000.00

2,830.00

1,187.75

418.00

157.50

1s,25.$1

23S.00

1,200.00

1,000.00

618.S0

1,000,00

.05s.17

15,000.00


4$ 96981*.7


Total














C4*twibvtimaw to Domi t for Ubai PUIPhasOs
trim Reoawah nago. -IOWS@2


Department or Aft

Department ao Englis.h

Department of coeoly

Department of Mathematics

Departments of History and Neaomics
(Joint eantribuation)

D~par~mto of 3nglisb, iHtovy and
Politica2l Solno.: (Jolt sOntrFtIution)

Departments of ktany Ornamental Horticaulture*
sad Plant Potholeny (Joint contribution)

Portuguese4pauish Leanuage and Area Coster


Total


$ 672.50

4,94S,00

1,000.00

2,20822

425.00



900.00


1,499.97

1,000.00


$12,654,69











._.... UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
...-: -- .- GAINESVILLE


THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OFFICE OF THE DEAN


July 30, 1964


re. J. -'ayne Reitz -
President
226 Ti;ert Hll. -
Campus

Dear Dr. Reitzt


Attached herewith are the original and two copies of
the Biennial Repcrt cf the Office of Ccntract cosearch for
the period 1962-64.


Sincerely yours,




L. E. printerr
Director of Fasearch


L./g


:
-Ii -..-


-
--
,-- ...~----li~i; t ~i~---~-i~---.
I


-I









I Report of the Director of Research; 1962-64 Biennium:. -.;

S.E. Grinter -

' Growth of Sponsored Research.-The volume of sponsored research

has grown steadily at the University of Florida during the 1962-64

biennium. The face value of grants and contracts for research from

outside sources which was $7,204,732 on January 1, 1962 bad increased

to $10,461,533 on January 1, 1964, two years later. The annual rate .

of expenditure computed by dividing each grant by the number of years

in which it will be in force was $4,388,689 at the beginning of the

biennium and $6,912,777 two years later, an increase of 57 per cent.

The total University expenditures for research are much more crudely

estimated at 15 million dollars for the year 1952-63. Exact figures

for research expenditures cannot be produced because faculty time is

not allocated to various duties and neither capital expenditures nor

expense are subject to such allocations.

Character of Research.--It is difficult to class research as

fundamental or applied without reference to the field of the research

itself. Basic research in engineering would probably be applied

research in physics for example. However, the best estimate based

upon the variable definition of the terma "basic" is that about 90 per

cent of the research is basic or fundamental for the field involved and

that 10 per cent is strictly applied. It is therefore not surprising

that cnly 6.08 per cant of the sponsorship of research is by industry

VV industrial associations while 88,17 per cent is supported by Federal

agencies. Since no pressure is exerted on professors or departments to








seek any particular sponsoranip it seems eviaena tart the airecotic oa:

sponsorship is influenced by the objectives of the faculty and of course

by the relative ease with which funds are granted. The most effective :

procedure for changing the direction of the. research of an institution.

is through its faculty recruitment program, a -

growth of Rfestarch by College. -The f iures for growth of research

for the individual colleges are significant both as to present status

and probably as a future trend. Over the biennium the research contracts

and grants in Agriculture and Forestry increased from $671,772 to $1,277,511

an increment of 90 per cent. For the College of Arts and Sciences-the

corresponding change from January 1, 1962 to January 1, 1963 was from

$1,709,209 to $2,317,777 an increase of 35 per cent. The college of

Business Administration increased the face value of its grants and con-

tracts from $52,000 to $275,746, a five-fold increment. In Engineering

the change was from $2,698,801 to $3,053,585 an increase of 13 per cent.

Grant research in the College of Medicine grow from $1,472,045 to

$2,447,020 a chzane of 66 per cent. Also the College of Pharmacy increased

the face value of its grants and contracts froiam 2,107 to $114,391 nearly

a three-fold change. The largest research growth is clearly that of the

College of Medicine which continues to place recruiting emphasis upon

research productivity of new faculty with readily predictable results.

Another very significant change is that of Agriculture where increased

attention is now being given to obtaining crants and research contracts.

Evidence of Rasearch Strearth.--Of ccrc~, resrch graduate

work go hand and hand. Hence the increases in research sponsorship

indicated above have bean accompanied by a 30 per cent increase in the

number of graduate students during the 19ei2-C4 biannium. The number of

postdoctoral fellows is anotherr evIdetuc of growing strength in reac'arch.







*-'w -:'; '.-^ T

In 1961-62 there were 27 postdoctoral research fellows o associates on :

the campus. This number had more than doubled to 58 in 1963-64 Summer

research appointments for the faculty continue to be made at a level of

ton per year. .However,.the interest and need may be expressed at four

to five tinos that number. Also, the continuing success of the Graduate

Research Professor program in attracting persons of distinction to the

campus even though small in number gives further evidence that the

University of Florida Is maturing as a research center and that in time

it will be classified in the group of distinguished research and graduate

institutions. .:

Future Volu.o of Pesearch--The factor of volume of research can be

projected into the future by study of growth curves for the University

of Florida and for other institutions. In the Role and Scope Report the

University of Florida growth line of sponsored research was projected by

comparison with the rate of growth of research at the University of Kentucky,

at Purdue University,and at the University of Illinois. The University

of Florida data were available for the years from 1948 to 1960 as shown

in Fir. 1. If extrapolated to 1964 according to its 1950-60 growth line

our current volume of sponsored research would be about 4 million dollars

per year while it is actually about 7 million dollars per year. Hence

by observing rig. I it becomes evident that the Tgrowth curve of sponsored

research at the University of Florida accelerated rapidly and has reached

the most optimistic growth line projected in 1960, i.e., the rate of

growth of the University of Illinois. If this rate of growth can be

continued, the annual volumr of sponsored roesarch at the University of

Florida should reach 12 nillicn dollars in 1970 and 17 million dollars








,in;197.. Of course, to- achieve this rate .o growth research productiv-:

ity Mi.t be a quality sought in each new faculty. appointment. If large

sections of the University see their role to be that of undergraduate

teaching and if they recruit faculty without considerable emphasis upon

research productivity or probability of such productivity, the favor-

able growth line of the past five years will not be maintained.:

.-: The Research Division and the raturc of Sponsored Resenrch.,-With

the fornal establishment of a Division of Research the University is in

position to expand its promotional activities related to sponsored

research. If the University of Florida is to become a distinguished

institution, it should triple its income from sponsored research in the

next decade. This will require that it continue on the growth curve of

the past five years as indicatedin Fig, 1. If the Division of Research

can retain a part of the overhead funds on sponsored research and make

this available for development of the research program through the

Graduate School an even faster rate of progress can be achieved. This

will require that the Division of Research work in close relationship to

the Graduate School. The Division of Research nust develop an irae for

itself that relates it to the academic function rather than the business

function of the University so that it iry have the cooperation of the

fa l t .- ..

r- t-t is confidently believed that the combined strength of the Division

of Research and. the Graduate School can stimulate the necessary activities

to bring the University of Florida into the category of a distinguished

institution by 1975 or earlier. This will require many joint efforts of

a cooperative nature bccau3e the funds of all majoP ~;rzaduate pro-rars

and their attendant research sees almost certain to be supported












Income for research from
18_ contracts and grants 18
17 -- Total organized research 17
16_ expenditures .." 16
S 15- .... Projected Growth / U. of Illinois \15
15k 15
0 14- -/ ~14
H 13- .' 13
12- U. of Illinois 12
S11 11
S10- -..* 10
;-c> ,sA 9
8- 8 ov- 9
-**-"" *.*--" ---e....**..
0 7 0 Purdue U. 0W~. e 7

S--- Ohio S.U. -. e .s- 5
14- 4
S-.*"* ... **
"i W 3- 3
S4 2- KPrdue c June 1964 Actual $7,869,551. 2

of ?o 10 U.' of Kentucky
o- o
0 O
1948 1950 1952 1954 1956 1958 1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1975

Years

Fig. 1.--Research income for University of Florida from contracts and grants projected to
1975 by growth curves of the past decade.










in -larg measure' by Fedealrin ta even'be efore 1975.. The Divisiton of

Research will nneed t0 contribute even more he-6wily..Iak. thle future'than

in the past to acccn~pU-h this result.









UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
Gainesville


The Graduate School
Office of the Dean July 15, 1964





Dr. J. Wayne Reitz, President
University of Florida
226 Tigert Hall
Campus

Dear Dr. Reitz:

I am enclosing a copy of the Semiannual Report on Research
Contracts and Grants current in my office as of June 30, 1964.

The total face value of the contracts and grants listed is
$11,898,488. A very rough estimate of the annual rate is computed
by dividing the face value of each contract by the years in force,
which was determined as of June 30, 1964 to be $7,869,554. The
summary analysis also includes an item called Research Backlog.
This is an estimate of the unexpired value of contracts as of
June 30, 1964 and it is computed from the face value divided by
the years in force multiplied by the unexpired period. This figure
was $5,119,193 as of June 30, 1964.

As in the last previous report this semiannual summary includes
total amounts received for new contracts and grants and the amount
received due to extensions or renewals of contracts and grants.

Copies of this report will go to each department engaged in
contract research and to the Business Office.

Cordially yours,



L. E. Grinter
Director of Research
















OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH

Analysis of Sources of Research Contract and Grant Funds--June 30, 1964


Categories of Sponsors

Supported by Department of Defense. ..............
Supported by Other Federal, State, or Local Government ....
Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or Societies .
Supported by Industry or Industrial Associations .


Total face value of contracts in force
Face value divided by years in force .
Research backlog or unexpired value of
in force as of June 30, 1964. .


Amount

. $ 2,374,307.00
. .. 8,156,774.00
. .. 632,151.00
. .. 735,256.00


. $ 11,898,488.00
. .. 7,869,554.00
contracts
. .. 5,119,193.00


University Breakdown

Agriculture and Forestry
Arts and Sciences
Bus.ess Administration
Education
Engineering
Medicine
Pharmacy
Institutional Grants
Other


Face Value

$ 1,464,330.70
2,640,937.50
235,977.00
54,490.00
3,457,425.80
2,875,116.00
169,650.00
732,083.00
268,478.00


New Contracts and Grants

$ 388,296.00
433,107.00


315,208.00
454,511.00
40,200.00


69,040.00


No. Extensions or Renewals

41 $ 383,353.00
16 293,967.00


13 306,866.00
39 1,070,142.00
2 20,952.00

1 300.00


460 $ 11,898,488.00

Categories of Services Performed

Direct Probable Benefit to Industry. ... . .
Contribution to Human Health .. . ..
Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture and Forestry. ......
Contribution to the National Safety (Defense) . .
Basic Research and Educational Contracts . ...


96 $1,700,362.00

Amount'*

S. $ 1,813,182.00
. . 3,390,918.00
. . 1,266,081.20
. . 1,620,580.00
. . 10,243,601.93


112 $2,075,580.00

Percentage*

15.24
28.50
10.64
13.62
86.09


*Many projects contribute to more than one service objective, hence any total of these groups would be meaningless.


Percentage

19.95
68.55
5.31
6.18









UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
Gainesville


The Graduate School
Office of the Dean January 19, 1964





Dr. J. Wayne Reitz, President
University of Florida
226 Tigert Hall
Campus

Dear Dr. Reitz:

I am enclosing a copy of the Semiannual Report on Research
Contracts and Grants current in my office as of December 31, 1963.

The total face value of the contracts and grants listed is
$10,461,533.00. A very rough estimate of the annual rate is com-
puted by dividing the face value of each contract by the years in
force, which was determined as of December 31, 1963 to be $6,912,777.00.
The summary analysis also includes an item called Research Backlog.
This is an estimate of the unexpired value of contracts as of
December 31, 1963 and it is computed from the face value divided by
the years in force multiplied by the unexpired period. This
figure was $4,630,129.00 as of December 31, 1963.

As in the last previous report this semiannual summary includes
total amounts received for new contracts and grants and the amount
received due to extensions or renewals of contracts and grants.

Copies of this report will go to each department engaged in
contract research and to the Business Office.

Cordially yours,



L. E. Grinter
Director of Research


Enclosure
















OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH


Analysis of Sources of Research Contract and Grant Funds--December 31, 1963


Categories of Sponsors


Supported by Department of Defense .. . .
Supported by Other Federal, State, or Local Government ....
Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or Societies .
Supported by Industry or Industrial Associations .


Amount

$ 2,164,372.00
7,059,596.00
601,143.00
636,422.00


University Breakdown
Agriculture and Forestry
Arts and Sciences
Business Administration
Education
Engineering
Medicine
Pharmacy
Institutional Grants
Other


Total face value of contracts in force
Face value divided by years in force .
Research backlog or unexpired value of
in force as of December 31, 1963.

No. Face Value
138 $ 1,277,511.00
88 2,317,777.00
7 275,746.00
2 80,174.00
72 3,053,585.00
101 2,447,020.00
10 114,391.00
3 732,083.00
8 163,246.00


contracts
*


$10,461,533.00
6,912,777.00

4,630,129.00

New Contracts and Grants
$ 136,214.00
433,642.00
235,977.00

251,590.00
171,073.00
5,346.00
670,000.00
43,900.00


No. Extensions or Renewals
28 $ 214,959.00
21 497,856.00


12 561,651.00
36 944,642.00
6 81,738.00
2 62,083.00
3 113,446.00


429 $10,461,533.00


$1,947,742.00


108 $2,476,375.00


Categories of Services Performed

Direct Probable Benefit to Industry . .
Contribution to Human Health. . .
Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture and Forestry .. ...
Contribution to the National Safety (Defense) .
Basic Research and Educational Contracts. . .


Amount*

S . .$ 1,755,067.00
2,966,874.00
.... .. 1,055,944.00
. . 1,327,677.00
. . 9,089,582.00


*Many projects contribute to more than one service objective, hence any total of these groups would be meaningless.


Percentage

20.69
67.48
5.75
6.08


Percentage*

16.78
28.36
10.09
12.69
86.89


. . .
. . .











UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
Gainesville.

The Graduate School
Office of the Dean July 19, 1963




Dr. J. Wayne Reitz, President
University of Florida
226 Tigert Hall
Campus

Dear Dr. Reitz:

I am enclosing a copy of the Semiannual Report on Research
Contracts and Grants current in my office as of June 30, 1963.

The total face value of the contracts and grants listed is
$9,536,501.30. A very rough estimate of the annual rate is com-
puted by dividing the face value of each contract by the years in
force, which was determined as of June 30, 1963 to be $6,449,496.92.
The summary analysis also includes an item called Research Backlog.
This is an estimate of the unexpired value of contracts as of
June 30, 1963 and it is computed from the face value divided by
the years in force multiplied by the unexpired period. This
figure was $3,865,821.34 as of June 30, 1963.

As in the last previous report this semiannual summary includes
total amounts received for new contracts and grants and the amount
received due to extensions or renewals of contracts and grants.

Copies of this report will go to each department engaged in
contract research and to the Business Office.

Cordially yours,



L. .E Grinter
S Director of Research

Enclosure
















OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH


Analysis of Sources of Research Contract and Grant Funds--June 30, 1963

Categories of Sponsors


Supported by Department of Defense. . . .
Supported by other Federal, State, or Local Government. .
Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or Societies . .
Supported by Industry or Industrial Associations . .


Total face value of contracts in force .
Face value divided by years in force .
Research backlog or unexpired value of contracts
in force as of June 30, 1963. .


Amount


. $ 2,072,963.30
* 6,233,354.00
. 537,708.00
S -447,874.00


$9,536,501.30
6,449,496.92

3,865,821.34


University Breakdown

Agriculture and Forestry
Arts end Sciences
Business Administration
Education
Engineering
Health Related Services
Medicine
Pharmacy
Other


Face Value

$ 1,258,002.00
1,950,039.00
39,769.00
124,392.00
3,280,133.80
53,395.00
2,458,877.50
97,955.00
273,938.00


No. New Contracts and Grants

34 $ 409,338.00
10 210,148.00
1 39,769.00

16 250,938.00

19 456,499.00
-- ---


No. Extensions or Renewals

32 $ 236,198.00
17 423,555.00


379,052.00

663,769.00
18,700.00


375 $ 9,536,501.30

Categories of Services Performed

Direct Probable Benefit to Industry . .
Contribution to Human Health .
Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture and Forestry .
Contribution to the National Safety (Defense) .
Basic Research and Educational Contracts. a & .


$1,366,692.00


. . .
. . a
. . t .
e l e .
eeIeetetesteee
eoteeteleeteeell


96 $1,721,274.00


Amount*

$ 1,607,574.00
3,102,074.50
1,082,944.00
1,330,794.00
8,189,768.30


*Many projects contribute to more than one service objective, hence any total of these groups would be meaningless.


Percentage

21.73
65.36
5.63
4.69


Percentage*

16.85
32.52
11.34
13.95
85.87


.










UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
Gainesville

The Graduate School
Office of the Dean January 31, 1963





Dr. J. Wayne Reitz, President
University of Florida
226 Tigert Hall
Campus

Dear Dr. Reitz:

I am enclosing a copy of the Semiannual Report on Research
Contracts and Grants current in my office as of December 31,
1962.

The total face value of the contracts and grants listed
is $8,846,427.49. A very rough estimate of the annual rate
is computed by dividing the face value of each contract by the
years in force, which was determined as of December 31, 1962
to be $5,725,217.65. The summary analysis also includes an
item called Research Backlog. This is an estimate of the un-
expired value of contracts as of December 31, 1962 and it is
computed from the face value divided by the years in force and
multiplied by the unexpired period. It had increased to
$3,906,110.17 as of December 31, 1962.

As in the last previous report this semiannual summary
includes total amounts received for new contracts and grants
and the amount received due to extensions or renewals of
contracts and grants.

Copies of this report will go to each department engaged
in contract research and to the Business Office.

Cordially yours,



L. E. Grinter
Director of Research


Enclosure















OFFICE OF CONTRACT RESEARCH

Analysis of Sources of Research Contract and Grant Funds--December 31, 1962


Categories of Sponsors

Supported by Department of Defense . . .
Supported by other Federal, State, or Local Government . .
Supported by Non-Profit Foundations or Societies . .
Supported by Industry or Industrial Associations . .


.$.,..


Amount

1,668,403.80
5,987,916.00
517,828.00
663,629.69


Total face value of contracts in force .
Face value divided by years in force. .
Research backlog or unexpired value of contracts
in force as of December 31, 1962 .


. $ 8,846,427.49
S 5,725,217.65

. 3,906,110.17


University Breakdown

Agriculture and Forestry
Arts and Sciences
Business Administration
Education
Engineering
Health Related Services
Medicine
Pharmacy
Other


Face Value

$ 925,968.00
1,852,554.96
40,178.00
124,392.00
2,987,410.53
54,970.00
2,127,318.00
97,948.00
635,688.00


374 $ 8,846,427.49


No. New Contracts and Grants

13 $ 115,850.00
15 227,805.00
1 5,000.00
1 25,684.00
24 862,408.80
1 47,495.00
14 158,712.00
5 48,644.00
9 19,950.00

68 $ 1,511,548.80


Categories of Services Performed

Direct Probable Benefit to Industry . .
Contribution to Human Health . .
Direct Probable Benefit to Agriculture and Forestry. .
Contribution to the National Safety (Defense) .
Basic Research and Educational Contracts . .


Amount *

S. . $ 1,561,266.69
. . 2,653,333.00
. . 764,607.00
. . 1,212,363.00
S. . 7,999,027.49


No. Extensions or Renewals

17 $ 315,489.00
22 301,622.00


12 224,338.00

30 633,154.00
4 34,439.00
2 90,473.00

87 $ 1,599,515.00


Percentage *

17.65
29.99
8.64
13.70
90.42


*Many projects contribute to more than one servi objective, hence any total of these groups would meaningless.


Percentage

18.86
67.69
5.85
7.50













Summer Research Appointments


By action of the Research Council and approval by the

President, the following faculty appointments for research during

the summers of 1963 and 1964 were approved* Each individual was

appointed for a two-month period at the regular summer rate as a

teacher. It is believed that each of these appointments will

result eventually in a significant research or scholarly publica-

tion. The appointments were for the following individuals

1963 Summer Session

W. E. Carter Anthropology
M. Z. Kafoglis Economics
Harry Kantor Political Science
J. D. Wells Economics
J. M. Wright Psychology
Lalia P. Boone English
T. W. Herbert English
W. J. Howe Mathematics
Silvestro fiore Foreign Languages

1964 Summer Session

E. C. Troupin Music
M, L, Entner History
G. E. Bigelow English
Peter Lisca English
A. B. Clubok Political Science
Didler Craeffe Humanities
F. C. Haber History
John Spanier Political Science
H. A. Wilson Social Sciences
Be H. Waugh English



















APPENDIX







Out-of-Town Meetings Regarding Research

Contributions to Departments for Research
Equipment

Contributions to Departments for Library
Purchases












Out-of-Town Keetin s RepardinR Research


October S, 1962: Attended meeting of the Latin American Scientific
Cooperation Committee of the National Academy of Science,
Washington, D. C., regarding Latin American programs of
research and education.

November 1-3, 19621 Attended University-National Aeronautics Space
Administration Conference, Chicago, Illinois, regarding NASA
research programs and support of university research.

November 13, 1962t Meetings with officials of the National Aero-
nautics and Space Administration, Washington, D. C., regarding
University of Florida's fellowship, science-engineering, and
Cape Canaveral impact study proposals. Tho University of
Florida group included President J. Wayne PFitz, Dean D. J.
Hart, Dr. M. E. Forsman, Dr. A. H. Gropp, and L. E. Grinter.

June 20-21, 1963: Attended Conference on Federal Programs of Education
and Research, American Council on Education, Washington, D. C.

December 2-3, 1963: Attended Space Industry Seminar conducted by
the Committee of 100, Orlando, Florida.

March 10-12, 1964i Attended National Institutes of Health Research
Administration Seminar, Bethesda, Maryland.

May 25, 1964: Meetings with officials of (1) U. S. Office of Education,
regarding matching grant for Graduate School and International
Studies Buildin., (2) nationall Science Fcundaticn recardinr
institutional grant and (3) National Aeronautics and Space
Administration regarding institutional grant.