Irvine

The authors of California's plan to spend $3 billion on human embryonic stem-cell research met this week to work out how the money should be distributed. The group has always said it plans to create a miniature version of the National Institutes of Health; the meeting gave it a taste of how hard that is likely to be.

On 6 and 7 December, experts on grant-making, facilities management, research ethics and intellectual property met at a conference hosted by the National Academy of Sciences in Irvine, California. They produced a lengthy list of details to be hammered out before any grants can be awarded.

The grant money will come from Proposition 71, a measure that was designed to fill a funding gap left by federal limitations on stem-cell research. The initiative, which passed on 2 November, establishes the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, but leaves details of how the institute will be run to committees that have yet to be formed. State officials must nominate members of the supervisory committee by 13 December — 9 out of 29 had been chosen when Nature went to press — and three advisory committees must be appointed by mid-January.

Some decisions will need to be made quickly. Denis Baylor, senior scientific officer at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, wanted to know whether grants would be awarded on the basis of the merits of the researchers, as his institute's are, or on the details of proposals. “Do you fund people, or projects?” he asked.

Several of the 150 audience members voiced concerns about decisions that have already been made. Nicole Dicks, finance chief of California's Burnham Institute in La Jolla, says she is bothered by fine print that might make life hard for small institutes like hers. Normally, at least one-third of a grant goes to funding facilities and administration costs, but Proposition 71 caps overheads at 25%. Unless this changes, only organizations big enough to pay the difference will be able to accept Proposition 71 money, she says.

Robert Klein, the Palo Alto real-estate developer who was the prime mover behind the initiative and is a likely candidate to chair the supervisory committee, remains undaunted. “These aren't pitfalls, they are challenges,” he told delegates.