Journey to Now: The Origins of ABRF.

The development and expansion of the core facility concept are <4 decades old. The factors that favored the use of shared instrumentation facilities and the requirement for expert staff are covered by one of the founders of the Association of Biomolecular Resource Facilities (ABRF). During the decade when grants for shared instruments and the release of modern, automated instruments flourished, protocol development for those new instruments came primarily out of laboratories of the type we now call core facilities. Because of the new technologies available, new protocols were required to meet the needs of research communities, and much of the development took place in the diverse core facilities. Furthermore, technology development itself was a frequent activity in core facilities. Although guidelines for the operation of core facilities were not available in the early days of core facility operation, they evolved over time. Cost recovery was, and is still, one of the most problematic issues for core facilities. ABRF-supported research groups offered members opportunities to evaluate their capabilities with both lab-developed protocols and study-specified protocols and with comparative data collected in surveys of core facilities. Research groups are a premier activity of ABRF and its members. More new developing technologies have followed using this pattern of collaboration among core facilities and with industry. The exhibition floor at ABRF annual meetings shows off many of the results of these collaborations.

Association of biomolecular resource facilities survey: service laboratory funding.

In 2007, The Association of Biomolecular Resource Facilities (ABRF) Survey Committee surveyed the ABRF membership and scientists at-large concerning the current state of funding in service-oriented laboratories. Questions pertained to services offered, cost recovery, capital equipment funding, and future outlook. The web-based survey, available for 3 weeks, achieved participation from 209 respondents in 13 countries, 77% of which represented academic laboratories. Most respondents (75%) directed their laboratories. Laboratories depend largely on institutional support and customer recharges to fund operations, but National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation Shared Instrumentation Grant programs are considered critical to meeting future needs. Source allocations supporting capital equipment acquisitions, operations, and laboratory director salary are presented.