Salary, Integrity and Selection of a New Chair for California’s $12 Billion Cell and Gene Therapy Enterprise
By David Jensen,
The California Stem Cell Report
| 05. 20. 2022
Photo by Giorgio Trovato on Unsplash
The directors of the $12 billion California stem cell agency are looking for a new chair who is both decisive and collaborative, passionate and inclusive. But at the top of the wish list is a person who is a pillar of integrity.
At least that is what a survey of the 35 board members showed today. The results were released this afternoon, less than one business day before the directors’ Governance Subcommittee takes up the matter of compensation and qualifications for the new chair.
The post carries a salary range that currently tops out at $566,500 annually. But that could be boosted by the directors of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), as the agency is officially known. Also figuring into the salary is whether the post should be a full-time job.
The new chair will oversee CIRM during the next decade or so, a period in which its results are likely to determine whether it lives or dies. Depending on its pace of spending, the agency will run out of cash...
Related Articles
By Sarah Kliff and Azeen Ghorayshi, The New York Times | 07.15.2024
By Elizabeth Chuck, NBC News | 07.09.2024
A Netflix docuseries has put a spotlight on the unregulated world of sperm donation, particularly the lack of stopgap measures that might prevent donors who have been banned by one country from simply going elsewhere to donate more.
Released earlier...
By Beth Duff-Brown, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research | 07.12.2024
The debate over in vitro fertilization (IVF) has become a hot-button policy and political issue, despite the medical procedure to help people become pregnant having been mainstream in the United States for nearly half a century.
The Alabama Supreme Court ...
By Peter Aldhous, Scientific American | 07.02.2024
In June a notice posted on the website of the journal Nature set a new scientific record. It withdrew what is now the most highly cited research paper ever to be retracted.
The study, published in 2002 by Catherine Verfaillie...