As previously noted at WUWT, over at the COLA/IGES website, they had this response to the disappeared letter to the Obama administration calling for RICO act investigations of climate skeptics:
WUWT reader Dean P. writes in comments on the WUWT story from earlier today:
The updated website says that they’ve been planning to shut down IGES for over two years now. That makes no sense since in October 2013 they were awarded NSF Grant #1338427, which started in May 2014 and is expected to continue into 2017. Does that mean they were planning to shutter the doors while they were still applying for grants? Did they tell the NSF that they planned on shutting down?
As others have said – something smells fishy…
Fishy? I’ll say, that award was updated in June 2015, to the tune of over 4 million dollars (yellow highlights mine):
It seems this is an active grant, good for another two years. It is important to note the name James Kinter in that NSF page, who is part of the Shukla nepotism empire:
IGES Personnel:
President Shukla, Jagadish
Business Manager Shukla, Anastasia
Assistant Business Manager Shukla, Sonia
Director, COLA Kinter, James
Assistant to the President Shukla, Sonia
Source: http://www.iges.org/aboutiges.html
…and so far, that four million dollar plus NSF grant has produced only one paper. From the NSF grant page:
ABSTRACT
This award provides continued funding for the Center for Ocean-Land-Atmosphere Studies (COLA). COLA is a climate science research center established to explore, establish and quantify the variability and predictability of Earth’s climate variations on seasonal to decadal time scales, and to harvest this predictability for societally beneficial predictions. The Center is jointly funded by NSF, NOAA and NASA.
Work supported through this award includes activities devoted to 1) basic research on predictability on intraseasonal, seasonal, interannual, and decadal timescales; 2) evaluation of the predictability, skill, and fidelity of US national climate models; and 3) contributions to the development of next generation seamless prediction systems. Research performed under item 1 includes testing of land data assimilation schemes in multiple models, performing hindcasts of El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) events investigate inter-event diversity of ENSO, performing dynamical prediction experiments for the Indian monsoon, and determining the dependence of drought probability on surface boundary conditions including land cover change. Work under item 2 focuses on the use of optimal spatial structures derived from information theoretic analysis, which represent the most predictable modes, or modes for which predictability differs the most between two models. This activity is intended to support climate prediction efforts at US national centers and contribute to COLA’s research-to-operations effort. Work under item 3 involves collaborators at the NOAA National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) and includes the development of optimal methods of initializing high-resolution coupled models including version 2 of the Coupled Forecast System (CFSv2), a model used operationally at NCEP.
The work has broader impacts due to its focus on research leading to improved climate prediction, given the substantial societal consequences of climate variability and change. In addition, COLA benefits the US climate research enterprise through community integration, education, seminars, workshops, and software and information services. COLA also serves an important function in transferring the results of basic climate science research on predictability and prediction into operational use.
PUBLICATIONS PRODUCED AS A RESULT OF THIS RESEARCH
Badger, A. M., and P. A. Dirmeyer. “Climate response to Amazon forest replacement by heterogeneous crop cover.,” Hydrol. Earth Sys. Sci., v.12, 2015, p. 879.
Source: http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1338427
Now, you might say that COLA isn’t the same as the IGES organization, and that might be true on paper, but the fact is that the http://iges.org website, soon to be “decommissioned” according to them, shows clearly that COLA and IGES are part of the same group, all under George mason University: (yellow highlight mine)
Note the COLA page is a sub-page of the IGES website:
With 4 million dollars and counting, good to 2017 according to NSF’s own grant page, the claim of the IGES/COLA website being “decommissioned” just doesn’t make any sense. It doesn’t wash. And, with a web page that still looks like it was designed in 1995, one wonders why Shukla’s clan didn’t put some of that money towards making a decent web page. After all, they only were able to make ONE paper with that 4 million dollars, according to NSF.
It gets better. Have a look at their staff page:
Source: http://www.iges.org/people/people.html
Lest Shukla and associates try to claim that IGES and COLA are somehow separate, their own COLA staff web page puts the issue to rest.
COLA appears to be a subset of the Shukla family run IGES. So if the IGES website was going to be “decommissioned”, and so by shutting down IGES, it would seem that would affect COLA too. I can’t find any plans or announcements on their website that says COLA is going to supplant/survive IGES.
A Google search yields no other “new” web pages for COLA. It only yields the IGES web page and COLA subset and the COLA webpage at George Mason University, which is an exact copy of the IGES/COLA front page:
Then there’s this symposium advert page at GMU:
Source: http://cola.gmu.edu/symposium/
Gosh, a COLA symposium and Shukla’s photo is prominently featured on it? It seems that IGES and COLA are indistinguishable when it comes to Shukla involvement. I wonder if Shukla predicted at that symposium on chaos, the current chaos he’s in the middle of as a result of the now disappeared RICO20 letter?
Let’s go back to the claim they uploaded in place of the disappeared RICO20 letter yesterday.
If COLA is a subset of IGES, and it appears to be so, with the same people running the outfit, their claim of “all research projects were completed in July 2015” seems more than a bit unbelievable. It also seems unbelievable to me that they’d “decommission” the only website (IGES.org) that represents COLA while it is receiving active NSF grants.
There’s quite a gravy train going on there it seems, and as Steve McIntyre pointed out in Shukla’s Gold, it seems there’s quite a bit of double dipping going on, despite GMU policy to the contrary:
Before discussing Shukla’s structure, I’ll first quickly comment on institutional policies, as both the federal agencies (NSF, NOAA, NASA) and the university (George Mason) purport to have policies that prevent double-dipping.
Perhaps the Shukla gravy train is about to be derailed once the true accounting is done. Read McIntyre’s excellent piece Shukla’s Gold, the monetary tentacles run deep and wide on this one, and I’m betting there are a lot of people at GMU, NASA, NOAA, and NSF fretting over damage control right about now.
Note: within about 10 minutes of publication, this article was edited for a spelling correction and a text formatting correction.
UPDATE:
http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/simpleSearchResult?queryText=Jagadish+Shukla
How many millions has this Shukla family organization taken from the American Taxpayer? How much of that money did they spend to create the RICO charge against climate skeptics?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Although this case is odious, I’m not certain it’s appropriate to focus on one man and his family. The attention should be on the entire CAGW gravy train.
Cut off one supporting leg at a time !!!!
You need an example.
Once he’s been strung up, then you go after the rest.
And I have no doubt whatsoever that there’s many more just as guilty.
One at a time seems to work better; it’s easier to understand the facts.
Interest in “global warming” dropped 87% since 2007. “Climate change” similarly low now.
Lack of interest can be interpreted as “nobody gives a damn; bring on the Kardashians.” That is not a good thing.
The IEGS IRS Form 990 for 2014 shows (page 7) President Shukla’s “Average hours per week” as “28.0” and his “Reportable compensation from the organization” as “$292,688. ” For Anne Shukla, Business Manager, the Average hours per week are “40” and the Reportable compensation is “$146,045.” Of course, Jagadish Shukla also has a salary from his employment at George Mason University.
>>How many millions has this Shukla family
>>organization taken from the American Taxpayer?
And what value for money did the taxpayer receive in return? Or is the offshore bank account feeling well lubricated? Having seen this all too often before, with these ‘close family organisations’, my gut feeling would go with the latter.
R
At this rate he might get invited to joint the Penn State faculty.
That would also be known as the State Penn faculty, Inpresume… 😉
For the tidy sum of 4 million, I too, would be a dauntless believer. We are being too hard on these folks. Who could resist such treasure?! Government agenda funding is creating these monsters. There is NO prudence… zero… zilch. GK
For accuracy’s sake, I looked at the NSF search site and found many fewer grants than the 2039 highlighted above. It appears that the search as done found all instances of “Jagadish” plus “Shukla”. Many of those grants are for Shukla in the biological sciences. When I used the advanced search feature, it returned 12 grants.
Correction 21 grants, not 12.
Yes, the “2039” figure is ridiculously wrong. I used advanced search and found only 14 NSF grants (checking “active” and “inactive” grants, and also checking for his name as co-PI). There may be other grants that are for the IGES and don’t have Shukla as PI or co-PI, but I didn’t search that way. Anthony, you should probably correct this in the main article.
FYI – the IGES being “dissolved” is probably related to the fact that it was previously an independent non-profit institution, but is now an “institute” at George Mason University. COLA is a “center” in the IGES. For universities, “institute” and “center” have very specific meanings (although this varies somewhat from state to state). In my state (North Carolina), a university “institute” must have at least two centers within its organization. And so that is probably why IGES has announced they are creating a new center called CREW (Center for Research on Environment and Water).
Before IGES was “dissolved,” some of the grants listed IGES as the primary organization. The most recent ones seem to list GMU. This may be related to the fact that IGES has become an institute within GMU (although it may be that IGES can continue to be listed as the primary organization; I’m not sure about this.) Regardless, it is probably the case that the grants to IGES as an independent organization DID end in 2015, and the ones he received through the university are the ones that are still active.
Ted’s interpretation of the transformation of IGES into a GMU Institute is how I see it too. Certainly the apparent machinations reported wouldn’t get through at any university that I’m familiar with: limitations to summer salary, annual required conflict of interest statements etc., with benefits and overhead you end up having to raise about double a researcher’s salary. I know of one faculty member who tried a similar scheme routing applications through a corporation owned by his wife, when it came to light he was fired. One other case was a Small Business research grant where the outside researcher wasn’t doing the work he claimed to do (a whistle-blower reported him), he was prosecuted (I had to give evidence in the case) and he had to repay his funding to the government and was banned from applying for government funding in future.
A quick bit of work at the NSF web site show the “Institute” has taken in $30,023,945 in NSF funds
Nice to see that Shukla won the Padma Shri Award from India in 2012, and the Walker Gold Medal from the Indian Metrological Institute. But through using which nation’s money?
And I love this article on Breibart about Shukla’s murky oast. Perhaps the MSM media senses blood after all. Arrrroooooooooo !!
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/22/lead-climate-scientist-behind-obamarico-letter-serious-questions-answer/
From the Breibart article…..
Quote:
Its a tough job, clearly, but someone’s got to do it. Which is why Shukla generously rewards its president – himself – with a salary of $330,000 for a 28 hour week and his wife (who works full time) another $166,000.
And that is on top of Shukla’s $250,000 salary from the university. Nice work, if you can get it. And these guys complain about ‘big oil’ money influencing Climate Realists !!
Note also that in paying himself and his wife $500,000 a year from these grants, there was little or nothing left over to do any research. So what did get done? Or was IGES simply a method of syphoning government grants straight into the Shukla joint bank account? And how much tax was paid on this income? And why did IGES get a charitable tax-free status? I think there are many questions that the tax payer needs answering.
R
Current positions of Shukla, from his Linked-In page:
Chairman, Climate Dynamics
George Mason University
2003 – Present (12 years)
Professor
George Mason University
1994 – Present (21 years)
President
Institute of Global Environment and Society (IGES)
1991 – Present (24 years)
See NSF conflict of interest policy–section 510
http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/manuals/gpm05_131/gpm5.jsp
congrats & thanx to Steve Mc, Anthony et al on digging into this story.
Shukla/Climategate: go to this thread and search for first comment by Myrrh and then read all comments thereafter:
Nov 2011: WUWT: CRU’s Dr. Phil Jones on “the lack of warming”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/30/crus-dr-phil-jones-on-the-lack-of-warming/
Epic find.
Steve Mc needs to read through that tanlged web.
Has Drudge got this yet?
from: http://iges.org/letter/LetterPresidentAG.pdf
“The letter that was inadvertently posted on this web site has been removed”
I “inadvertently” spill my coffee or forget to put out the garbage. I do not “inadvertently” build a web page, upload it to my web host and publish it. Right there someone clearly posted a lie.
I would not want to be a co-signer on any letter with Mr. Shukla. Maybe some of the other 19 would like an opportunity to go on the record that they “inadvertently” signed it.
Right about now they’d be awfully worried too many people inadvertently read it.
Enquiring minds want to know.
Have any of the RICO20 been involved in producing one of the IPCC’s GCMs? If so, which one(s)? How have the models done?
I want to be a climate researcher! Above the law, millions in grant money. No accountability. Being flown around the world. Mixing with famous people. And not having to work hard
And being paid to be wrong!
What a wonderful life!
And you don’t have to produce any results for 30 years; by which time you are ready and wealthy enough to retire.
g
I guess Shukla thinks that the “skeptical community” is dumb, and can easily be put off the trail by a few deft maneuvers. Instead he just manages to sink deeper into the quick sand.
Apologize for the mixed metaphor.
BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE!
IGES is listed as a 501(c)3, tax-exempt organization, so I looked at the 990 financial reports filed with the IRS and ran my Non-profit Strategic Profit Model on the organization. Very interesting. By the way, the only reference to COLA in the 990’s is in the compensation section where James Kinter is listed as Director COLA.
Highlights (or lowlights) from the 990 for IGES for the year ending 2014:
• Shows revenue for the year of $3,846,141. Of this $3,832,383 is listed as government grants and $13,646 in publication revenue.
• 990’s for 2012 – 14 show total government grant revenue of $11,618,315 for the three years.
• Top 5 employee compensation is $938,366 including $$333,048 for Jugadish Shakla – President, $166,097 for Anne Shakla – Business Manager and $180,038 for James Kinter – Director COLA. The executive compensation is 24.4% of revenue, far larger than what I normally see with nonprofits.
• The expense section has a number of differences from what I normally see with other nonprofits:
o Program service expenses at 78.5% of total expenses and Management and General are 33.1%
o Total compensation (45 employees) is 78.5% of expenses, with Payroll taxes, IT, occupancy and travel account for 14.9%.
o A single grant for $100,000 is listed as a domestic grant and was made to the Institute for Global Education, Equality of Opportunity and Prosperity (IGEP). The grant is listed as for educational purposes and in South Asia. More on this below.
o The financial statements show assets of almost $327K with $261K in cash and savings, no liabilities and a Fund balance of $327K.
Googling the Institute for Global Education, Equality of Opportunity and Prosperity (IGEP) leads to a page in the ides.org site, http://www.iges.org/gandhicollege/igep.html
This indicates that IGEP is also a 501(c)3, nonprofit and part of the mission statement is to support Gandhi College in the Ballia District of India. There is no compensation for the two listed directors, one of which is Anne Shulka – Secretary.
IGEP spends nearly all income on compensation. About 30% to its own “staff” and the rest to others as “program expenses”. It does not appear to do any work itself. Seemingly Iacting as an over compensated pass thru entity.
IGEP used $3.8 million in 2014. Next step is to whom were the program expenses paid and what was accomplished for the $2.7 million (estimated) spent. That could be more revealing than the “officer” salaries.
Didn’t they/(we) use to call families like this “Mafia”?
Looking at the George Mason University website, there is no attempt to hide the connection between COLA and GMU . The relevant doctoral program is “ClimateDynamics ”
https://cos.gmu.edu/aoes/academics/climate-dynamics-graduate-program/
where it says :
“The Climate Dynamics Program benefits from close ties with Center for Ocean-Land-Atmosphere Studies (COLA), a laboratory dedicated to studying the predictability of climate. In the summer of 2013, COLA moved to George Mason University’s Fairfax Campus”
If you look at the graduate program details it has presentations of the relevant topics which the newcomer to climatology might , as I did, find to be a useful intro .
On the other hand if i was an American taxpayer contributing the funds for the research I might wonder why COAL’s technical reports deal so often with weather patterns in India rather than closer to home and i might want to ask Prof Shukla why his 2013-4 submitted and accepted papers deal with that subcontinent almost exclusively.
http://www.iges.org/pubs/pubs.html
Also known as foreign aid!
Sorry, COLA not COAL (a Freudian slip?)
Would not be surprised in many of the co signers did not agree to have there names put there
Are we sure that Shukla also received a faculty salary from GMU? If so, he should be in real serious, as in, checking in at the iron bar hotel, trouble. Most universities regard faculty members as “professional” level employees, which means that they are expected to work however many hours needed to meet the expectations of their position. In other words modern Human Resources Management departments regard faculty as 100% employed by their university, whether they work 40 hr or 80 hr/week. Most universities do have a provision whereby, with permission, faculty members can do some compensated work outside the university, but I don’t know of any university that would ever approve 28 hr/week of outside employment for a full time faculty member. Tenured faculty where I work have been fired for much less unapproved outside earning than this. Does anyone know if Shukla is still at GMU? If so, either he, or the administrators who approved 28 hr/week outside employment (or both) will be in major trouble.
Correct. This is very serious.
That might result in firing, or even a lawsuit, but how would that be a criminal offense?
Misuse of government grant money, on the other hand, has more potential.
Agreed, as I posted above. If on an academic year salary you’re usually allowed to earn a summer salary elsewhere equivalent to about 2.5 months of academic salary, which has to be pre-approved. The apparent merging of IGES into GMU might mean there’s a transition period with different rules but I would expect that to require university presidential approval at least.
A professor should be able to legally and legitimately receive compensation from different sectors of the University (say, both the geology dept and the center for seidmentology). But the details matter when it comes to compliance with conflict of interest rules and limits on outside compensation. And the details surrounding IGES are as muddy as the Ganges.
HI, Phil. Steve McIntyre has posted (in the comments at CA) GMU’s rules on outside employment. He provided a link and quotation; here is part of that quote: “Employees may engage in certain employment outside the university, provided that the employee has obtained prior written approval of his or her supervisor and the employee complies with all relevant University policies, including policies regarding conflicts of interest, and annual leave; and records annual leave when performing outside employment during normal or scheduled working hours. Permission to engage in outside employment must be renewed annually in writing.
Employees may not engage in outside employment which the supervisor has determined, in his or her sole discretion:
Interferes with the employee’s regular responsibilities and duties; or
Results in any actual conflict or appearance of conflict with his or her University Employment responsibilities; or
Results in a situation of unfair competition for the University.”
So apparently he is okay as long as he has his “supervisor’s” permission (presumably, the chair of the department Shukla is a part of).
Ted, that’s broadly similar to the rules I’m familiar with, full-time faculty are normally limited to a max of one day a week and as you indicate it’s all subject to approval by department chairman or the Dean of the Faculty.
I’m aware of a colleague who was fired for something similar funneling grants through a company nominally run by his wife. The other similar situation is Salby’s problems at the University of Colorado where he was investigated by the NSF for his practice of funding work through his private company in parallel with his university research.
The demise of IGES is just more proof of the power of the conspiracy against climate change science. Cook and Lewandowski are probably working on a paper about it right now. /Sarc
While much of this stench is probably true, it’s important not to lose sight of the bigger picture. Shukla was accompanied in the RICO letter by many of his peers in the establishment. It’s a safe bet that all of them are funded by the NSF. That’s the stone under which any investigation must eventually look. Without the cooperation of NSF bureaucrats, this perversion of science could not have occurred. It would be interesting to know how the NSF’s climate budget changed during the extended period of such practices. Likewise for which side of the contentious issue the NSF invested that money (wink.. wink.. nudge).
If posting on that site was ‘inadvertent’, just where was it intended to be posted?