The University of Arizona, for example, canceled a science conference scheduled for April 2026, following the news that several speakers and organizers were named in the Epstein files. Astrobiologist Stuart Hameroff, for example, wrote on the social platform X on Feb. 6, 2026, that he “obtained one-time funding” for a conference from Epstein.

Bard College’s president, Leon Botstein, is among other academic leaders and researchers who have said that they met with Epstein for fundraising purposes – though, as The New York Times reports, Epstein rarely delivered on the money he promised for research and other purposes.

“There is a tremendous drive to acquire money to support the work of faculty and staff. The pressure has always been there – but you can still approach that in an ethically and morally acceptable way,” said Brian Herman, a former vice president for research at the University of Minnesota, in an interview that has been edited for length and clarity.

Amy Lieberman, the education editor at The Conversation U.S., spoke with Herman to understand how philanthropy for colleges and universities works, and what standards and safeguards are in place to help ensure that this money is given in an ethical manner.

How is research at universities typically funded?

Funding to support university research comes from a variety of different sources.

Most university research funding – approximately 53%-55% of that support – comes from the federal government, like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation.

About 8% of total funding comes from a number of private foundations and nonprofits, like the American Cancer Society.

Universities can also request that state and federal legislators allocate funding in their yearly appropriations bills for research. This involves negotiations between universities and their state and federal legislators. State and local agencies provide about 5% of total university research funding.

Universities themselves fund between 25%-26% of research, and businesses give 6%.

Other sources of funding, including individual donors, account for about 3% of the money that funds university research.

These individuals might be alumni of the university, have another kind of connection to the school or are personally interested in a specific area of expertise of the university. Or, they could be grateful patients who had medical issues solved by the university’s medical school.

How do universities connect with private donors?

Universities typically have fundraising offices that oversee relationships with donors.

Donor and university partnerships involve significant negotiations about how the money will be invested. Universities typically will work with faculty members with expertise in the area of research a donor wants to support and put together a research proposal. The prospective donor then reviews the plan and decides whether they want to support the research.

After universities receive and invest a donation, they give donors a progress report on the investment.

Private donors give money to the university, and not to an individual faculty member. This allows proper accounting and controls on how the money is used, to make sure they support the intended research and adhere to university policies.

How do universities screen donors for conflicts of interest, for example?

All universities have compliance offices that set up a compendium of policies that guide how they accept private funding.

The schools try to make sure there is no financial conflict of interest for the donor, researcher or institution – or a conflict of interest between people performing the research and those providing the funding.

There is practically always a need to strike a balance between managing potential conflicts appropriately and being able to obtain the resources necessary for a university to conduct its work.

Do universities typically screen for donors who have committed a crime?

Most universities screen potential donors.

The larger the dollar amount in question, the more substantive the screening is. Many universities have policies on this issue. It is likely that universities will strengthen these policies based on recent events related to the Epstein case. They will want to become more stringent with screening to make sure that their donors are not morally compromised.

For example, universities can conduct background checks on potential donors.

But if the donation is small, it is possible that a university would not conduct a background check. So, a faculty member could seek $5,000 for a conference and approach a donor individually and not involve the rest of the university in the donation.

How could the Epstein case influence how universities screen donors?

I expect that universities will enact more policies and procedures that guard against a situation like what we are seeing in the Epstein files. Universities may require more substantive checks on all donations independent of size and source. They are also likely to carry out more training of faculty, staff and administrators on how to secure individual donor support.

If universities have not already done so, I think they should instruct faculty members not to directly contact a donor or legislator on behalf of the university. They should also increase the penalties for university employees who do not comply with this policy.

In some cases, researchers may have an idea that is not aligned strategically with how the university is raising philanthropic funds. They may go looking for their own money. This doesn’t happen a lot, but it does happen, and universities will have to become more vigilant about these types of situations.

In reality, money is necessary to do most everything at universities, including paying faculty and staff, purchasing research supplies and even keeping the lights on in the research labs. Money is also a metric that is used as a measure of success and the ranking of a university – meaning, getting more money can lead to a higher ranking.

University leaders are facing natural pressure to raise money. There is a tremendous drive to acquire money to support the work of faculty and staff. This can create significant pressure to acquire funding – but this must always be done in an ethically and morally appropriate way.

Brian Herman, Vice President for Research, University of Minnesota

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.