Institutions had two opportunities in the survey to document their concerns regarding ARIF: in the general survey and for each instrument. On the whole, not many comments were given in the general survey. Figure C-4 shows a histogram of the common comments regarding ARIF listed in the itemized ARIF charts. The most prevalent concern was the difficulty of finding continuing support for the operation and maintenance of ARIF.
Among the ARIF detailed in the survey charts, an array of sources of support for capital costs were listed, from state governments, to the Department of Health and Human Services, to universities and individual university departments. Probably because of the expense, 62% of the ARIF reported had more than one funding source (see Figure C-5). Most (52%) had some institutional commitment, averaging $1.25 million per instrument or facility (see Figure C-6).
Data on the ARIF support from NSF were particularly surprising. Eight reported ARIF had NSF as a source of funding, including six for which the amount of funding was explicitly listed. Three of those were for amounts well over $2 million ($3.875, $4.35, and $2.68 million). That yielded an average award amount reported from NSF of $2.29 million. The respondents did not list the particular programs through which the NSF funding was acquired. We speculate that it was obtained through individual NSF divisions.