CIRM 2012 Strategic Plan Stakeholder Meeting
Eli and Edythe Broad Center for Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research (BCC)
1st Floor Conference Room
USC Health Sciences Campus
1425 North San Pablo Street
Los Angeles, California 90033
Campus Map (BCC in quadrant F3)
Valet parking available
RSVP: Anka Urbahn email@example.com
CIRM adopted a scientific strategic plan in 2006 (available here), and updated it in 2009 (available here). CIRM is now working on the 2012 update. As in prior years, we are seeking stakeholder input from patients, patient advocacy organizations, members of the public, researchers, and members of industry. During the meetings, CIRM will provide an overview of its vision, goals and progress to date, share the draft plans with you and then look forward to listening to your perspectives to how you think CIRM is doing in achieving its goals, and what you think CIRM could be doing differently. We look forward to an interesting and productive discussion.
The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) is a state agency that was established through the passage of Proposition 71, the California Stem Cell Research and Cures Act. The statewide ballot measure, approved by 59% of California voters on November 2, 2004, provides $3 billion in funding for stem cell research, research facilities and other vital research opportunities. Proposition 71 charged CIRM with determining the most effective means of using these funds to advance the entire field of stem cell biology and regenerative medicine, and to advance the development of cures and therapies.
“To support and advance stem cell research and regenerative medicine under the highest ethical and medical standards for the discovery and development of cures, therapies, diagnostics, and research technologies to relieve human suffering from chronic disease and injury.”
CIRM funds stem cell research at for-profit and not-for-profit institutions throughout California. Grants and loans are awarded as part of Requests for Applications (RFAs). Applications for these RFAs are reviewed by a panel of scientific experts and patient advocates, which makes recommendations to the Governing Board. The board then decides which projects to fund for each RFA.