Read the Documents (Part 1 of 2)

From:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>To:"Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject:FW: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019Date:Wed, 10 Oct 2018 16:31:24 -0400Importance:NormalI will explain.,From: Barton Haynes, M.D. <@duke.edu>Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2018 3:34 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Re: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019You bet!!!Let’s do itBest  bSent from my iPhoneOn Oct 10, 2018, at 11:23 AM, Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov> wrote:Thanks, Bart.   There is another one that looks possible for me if you are willing to do it.  As usual, I will supply all of thematerial.   It is the Dan David Prize. I will send you their e-mail separately in a minute.From: Barton Haynes, M.D. <@duke.edu>Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2018 12:56 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Fwd: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019Here you go!Best bartSent from my iPhoneBegin forwarded message:From: The Shaw Prize <@shawprize.org>Date: October 10, 2018 at 10:47:35 AM MDTTo: Barton F Haynes <@mc.duke.edu>Subject: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019Released by Chairman Rand Paul
The ShawPrize logoThe Shaw PrizeDear Professor Barton F Haynes,This letter is to confirm that we have received your nomination for The Shaw Prize in LifeScience and Medicine 2019. The nomination cannot be edited any further but if you haveany concerns or if an amendment is essential, you can contact us at any time on@shawprize.org.Thank you for your support,The Shaw Prize Secretariat.
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Barton Haynes, M.D." <@duke.edu>To:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>Cc:Kelly Soderberg <@duke.edu>Subject:RE: Heinz AwardDate:Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:09:21 -0500Importance:NormalInline-Images:~WRD153.jpg; image001.png; image002.jpgO they never did that I saw. Will ask Kelly? Kelly did the Heinz folks get back to us? Tony I am home all day today (we are snowed in andduke closed )  so I am available all day to day if you want to talk. Best bart From: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Sent: Monday, December 10, 2018 1:26 PMTo: Barton Haynes, M.D. <@duke.edu>Subject: Heinz Award Bart:    Did the Heinz Award people ever get back to you about the requirements for nomination?  Also, some time in the next week or so, we shouldcatch up on a few things.Best,Tony From: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2018 4:03 PMTo: 'Barton Haynes, M.D.' <@duke.edu>Cc: Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject: RE: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019 Thanks, Bart.   When you find out from them exactly what material we need for the nomination, please let me know and I will provide it.Best,Tony From: Barton Haynes, M.D. [mailto:@duke.edu]Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2018 2:57 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Cc: Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>; Shannon Devine <@duke.edu>; Kelly Soderberg<@duke.edu>Subject: RE: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019 Yep will do this straightaway.   This is a good one I think for you. Best bart From: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2018 2:53 PMTo: Barton Haynes, M.D. <@duke.edu>Cc: Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: FW: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019 Bart:    Another possible award would be the Heinz Award.  The category would be  for “The Human Condition” .  Paul Farmer has gotten this in thepast.  We can use the PEPFAR  piece in addition to the science and NIAID leadership issue.   We obviously will take care of all of that on my end.The only minor glitch is that in order to nominate me you need to write to them, send your CV and indicate that you want to serve as anominator.   They do this because they do not want just anyone nominating anyone.   If you do not mind, could you write to them with your CVand indicate that you would like to be a nominator (see below for explanation).  I got this from their website.  Let me know what you think. Many thanks.Best,TonyReleased by Chairman Rand Paul

 From: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2018 2:14 PMTo: 'Barton Haynes, M.D.' <@duke.edu>Cc: Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: RE: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019 Bart:    I just realized as I was going through the details of the nomination for the Dan David Prize that the themes  for the 2019 awards are notscience/medicine.   That was last year.   And so we will hold off on this until medicine/science returns as a theme.   Thanks anyway.Best regards,Tony From: Barton Haynes, M.D. <@duke.edu>Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2018 3:34 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Re: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019 You bet!!! Let’s do it Best  bSent from my iPhoneOn Oct 10, 2018, at 11:23 AM, Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov> wrote:Thanks, Bart.   There is another one that looks possible for me if you are willing to do it.  As usual, I will supply all of the material.   It is the DanDavid Prize. I will send you their e-mail separately in a minute. From: Barton Haynes, M.D. <@duke.edu>Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2018 12:56 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Fwd: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019 Here you go!Released by Chairman Rand Paul
   Best bartSent from my iPhoneBegin forwarded message:From: The Shaw Prize <@shawprize.org>Date: October 10, 2018 at 10:47:35 AM MDTTo: Barton F Haynes <@mc.duke.edu>Subject: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019
The Shaw PrizeDear Professor Barton F Haynes,This letter is to confirm that we have received your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science andMedicine 2019. The nomination cannot be edited any further but if you have any concerns or if an amendmentis essential, you can contact us at any time on @shawprize.org.Thank you for your support,The Shaw Prize Secretariat.
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
To:"Barton Haynes, M.D." <@duke.edu>Subject:RE: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019Date:Wed, 10 Oct 2018 13:00:14 -0400Importance:NormalThanks, Bart.   There is another one that looks possible for me.   It is the Dan David Prize.  I nominated Zeke Emanuel (forEthics work) last year and he won From: Barton Haynes, M.D. @duke.edu>Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2018 12:56 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Fwd: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019 Here you go! Best bartSent from my iPhoneBegin forwarded message:From: The Shaw Prize <@shawprize.org>Date: October 10, 2018 at 10:47:35 AM MDTTo: Barton F Haynes <@mc.duke.edu>Subject: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019
The ShawPrize logoThe Shaw PrizeDear Professor Barton F Haynes,This letter is to confirm that we have received your nomination for The Shaw Prize in LifeScience and Medicine 2019. The nomination cannot be edited any further but if you haveany concerns or if an amendment is essential, you can contact us at any time on@shawprize.org.Thank you for your support,The Shaw Prize Secretariat.
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
To:"charles dinarello" < @aol.com>Subject:RE: Fauci nomination for Dan David PrizeDate:Wed, 16 Dec 2020 16:45:31 -0500Importance:Normal  From: charles dinarello < @aol.com>Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 9:48 AMTo: Folkers, Greg (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Re: Fauci nomination for Dan David Prize Yes, I suspected for you and all who work in tony's office. But there is a clear internal  satisfaction in our work and now withthe Moderna vaccine, you can take pride in long days and endless weekends.  Please let me read the draft of the narrative.-----Original Message-----From: Folkers, Greg (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>To: charles dinarello <@aol.com>Sent: Mon, Nov 16, 2020 7:44 amSubject: RE: Fauci nomination for Dan David PrizeCOB does not exist for any of us  From: charles dinarello <@aol.com>Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 9:43 AMTo: Folkers, Greg (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Re: Fauci nomination for Dan David Prize Thursday is a very good day. Please tell Tony that the announcement this morning of the success of the second mRNAvaccine for Covid-19 should be emphasized since it was Tony and NIAD that took the risk and put the money  where it wasneeded. It should be in the long narrative (He is writing this). Tell him also that I have papers using mRNA vaccine againstcytokines in mice for several years and they work and  so I was thrilled that Tony took on this technology. As far as I know,mRNA vaccines have not been used previously in human trials. This abbreviation (COB) I think must mean Close ofBusiness but COB really does not exist for me nor for Tony. Please let me read the draft of the long narrative. We haveplenty of time.-----Original Message-----From: Folkers, Greg (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>To: charles dinarello <@aol.com>Sent: Mon, Nov 16, 2020 6:01 amSubject: RE: Fauci nomination for Dan David PrizeThis should be done by COB Thursday unless TF’s calendar evolves/devolves From: charles dinarello <@aol.com>Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 12:07 AMTo: Folkers, Greg (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Fauci nomination for Dan David Prize How are you doing? We still have plenty of time.Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Folkers, Greg (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>To:"Schneider, Johanna (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>, "Johnson, Martin S.(NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>Cc:"Folkers, Greg (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject:johanna, martin do u haveDate:Tue, 17 Nov 2020 11:31:54 -0500Importance:NormalAttachments:Fauci_nomination_for_Dan_David_award_2020-11-16_1330.docxI am working on thus nomination for the dan david award for asf Need to beef up the covid part – Do u have language in the can  (CJ, other) that u could share that delineates how we responded in many ways tocovid? I would tweak and fold a few key things into this   Disclaimer:  Any third-party material in this email has been shared for internal use under fair use provisions of U.S. copyrightlaw, without further verification of its accuracy/veracity.  It does not necessarily represent my views nor those of NIAID, NIH,HHS, or the U.S. government. Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>To:charles dinarello < @aol.com>Cc:"Folkers, Greg (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>, "Grady, Christine(NIH/CC/BEP) [E]" < @cc.nih.gov>Subject:RE: Dan David Prize SubmittedDate:Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:24:42 -0500Importance:NormalCharles:     Many thanks and love from the Fauci family.   Happy Thanksgiving to you and Edward.  Please stay safe and well.Warm regards,TonyAnthony S. Fauci, MDDirectorNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of HealthBethesda, MD Phone: FAX: E-mail: @niaid.nih.govThe information in this e-mail and any of its attachments is confidential and may contain sensitive information.  Itshould not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient.  If you have received this e-mail in errorplease inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage devices.  The National Institute ofAllergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) shall not accept liability for any statements made that are the sender'sown and not expressly made on behalf of the NIAID by one of its representatives.  From: charles dinarello < @aol.com>Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2020 1:16 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Cc: Folkers, Greg (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Dan David Prize Submitted What an ordeal to use the submission form when one cannot save it. It all must be done at once and no mistakes.Fortunately, I found a file with Tony's home and cell and NIH telephone numbers. These  days, once communicates withthe internet. But it's submitted and thank you Greg and Tony for doing most of the work.  Each year the Dan David Prizecommittee asks me for nominees. I am on a lot of Israeli lists because I am on the Board of the Weizmann Institute andhave an honorary degree from the Weizmann. This year, it was Public Health Present and Tony was the Obvious Nominee.Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @od.nih.gov>To:"Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>Cc:"Schwetz, Tara (NIH/OD) [E]" < @nih.gov>Subject:RE: Draft for your reviewDate:Fri, 29 Jan 2021 17:26:55 -0500Importance:NormalEmbedded:RE:_Dan_David_PrizeDisregard my request to talk, pls. I believe the better approach is for you to write Gretchen and ask her to review the package she has (NAM) and the others(AAAS (re-review), CDC and Dan David) once her office receives them.  We discussed that approach last evening.  Fromme, Gretchen knows Tony wants final decisions and is pressing you to go to HHS to get them.  Pls contact her first.  Upuntil now, OGC has not been the reason for the delay.  (I said last night that NAM’s delay lies mostly with me.)  PerhapsGretchen only needs a reason to ask for a revised prioritization of her work.  To clarify: NAM is pending with Gretchen.  Once Randy gets it, he may agree with us and then there is no need for it to go to OGE. Marilyn gave us comments on AAAS on Jan 7.  We asked AAAS for more information on Jan 12, and pinged them on Jan27.     CDC will go to OGC on Monday and it will be approved.  (I misspoke before.  We needed something from NIAID prior toforwarding the package to OGC, and we got that today.)  Dan David was reviewed in 2011 (Gretchen sent me the attached email), so if we can confirm a few things with Dan David– it’s very likely we can, that should be approved too.  Re: GA Tech and Vanderbilt, we’re in agreement that those are closed?  Tony was told that he could not receive the moneyfrom GA Tech.  He has not been told our conclusion re:  Vanderbilt.  (I attempted that in my draft status email thismorning.)  I briefly discussed both awards with Gretchen and she also agrees, but has not seen the paperwork.  Heragreement was based on their grantee status. If you still want to go to HHS, pls see below. From: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 1:36 PMTo: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] < @od.nih.gov>Cc: Schwetz, Tara (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Subject: Draft for your reviewImportance: High Draft -  let me know what you think. I would send to HHS C-O-S, his counselor Dawn O’Connell, and Anne Reid. With apologies for adding to your very full plate. I am writing to you in my role as NIH Deputy Ethics Counselor to ask forhelp in expediting OGC’s review of a number of awards for Dr. Anthony Fauci. I am told (and appreciate) that OGC staff are now working on ethics clearance for new appointees, but several awardsneed (or soon will need) OGC’s attention. Given the visibility of Dr. Fauci and the visibility of these prestigious awards it isbecoming increasing uncomfortable for him to explain why no decision has been reached. This will be furthercompounded by the latest award that Dr. Fauci has been notified about (the Dan David prize from Israel) which they wishto announce on Feb 15. To be clear, Dr. Fauci knows he can accept the honor of these awards, but each also comes with aReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
significant monetary award. The sponsors are eager for information as to whether he can accept the cash prizes.  [Tony’sassistant routinely tells the sponsors as soon as NIAID is notified that Tony is an award recipient that the cash prizes needheighten review.  And we don’t just want to say no; we want to try to get to yes.  Yes takes time.] Would it be possible to elevate the priority of the review of these awards by OGC please:National Academy of Medicine Gustav O. Lienhard awardCDC Foundation Fries Prize AAAS Philip Abelson PrizeThe Dan David Prize lat    Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E]" < @od.nih.gov>To:"Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @od.nih.gov>Subject:RE: Dan David PrizeDate:Fri, 29 Jan 2021 15:17:35 -0500Importance:NormalHolli:  Here is discussion from 2011.  If you can confirm that nothing has changed, including the “attendant events” thatare now mentioned on the web site, this should be helpful.  I did all of the leg work.  Ed took this information to OGE andOGE accepted the award as bona fide even though the subject area to be recognized changes, etc.:  The Dan David Foundation awards three $1 million Dan David Prizes each year (since 2002), recognizing past, present, andfuture achievements.  For each time dimension, a field is chosen, and one or more recipients are selected.  If more thanone recipient is selected in a field, the cash prize is shared.  The categories for 2012 are:  Past – History/Biography; Present– Plastic Arts; and Future – Genome Research.  Notably, laureates donate 10% of their prize money to graduate studentsof their choice.   NASA and DOE employees are among the prior recipients (they received the award in 2007). International panels of experts in each of the fields to be recognized evaluate the nominees based upon the description ofeach field of recognition posted on the web site and submit reports to the Dan David Prize Board (an international panelselected by the Dan David Foundation Board).  The DDP Board makes the final determination as to which nominee(s) ineach category have achieved that which the prize is intended to recognize (as described in the category descriptions). More information is available at: http://www.dandavidprize.org/, including the composition of the DDP Board. After reviewing the web site, other publicly available information, and the materials our NASA colleagues were able toprovide, I made contact with the Chair of the Dan David Foundation Board, Professor Itamar Rabinovich, and theadministrative Director of the Prize, Ms. Smadar Fisher.  Based on all of the information I have been able to obtain , itappears that the Prize program is “owned” by the Dan David Foundation, although there is a relationship between it andTel Aviv University pursuant to which Tel Aviv provides space and administrative support for the award program. Professor Rabinovich was the President of Tel Aviv University when Dan David began his Foundation and an agreementwas reached.  Professor Rabinovich confirmed that the Foundation could opt to move the administrative headquarters ofthe Prize out of the University. Upon review of the web site, you may also notice reference to French Collaboration.  The Dan David Foundation enteredinto an agreement with the French Government in 2006.  Professor Rabinovich has said that this was intended to furtherthe international outreach efforts of the Foundation.  In alternating years the Prize ceremony is held in France.  Inexchange, two or three seats on the Dan David Prize Board “belong” to the French.  The current composition of the Boardis at:  http://www.dandavidprize.org/about/about-the-board.html.  Based upon the available information, and in light of OLC’s opinions (particularly the more recent award opinion coveringthe President’s Nobel Prize), I do not think the Dan David Prize implicates the Emoluments Clause or the Foreign Gifts andDecorations Act. Although Tel Aviv University is an NIH grantee, I do not think the Dan David Prize implicates our Supplemental Standardbecause the Prize appears to be from the Dan David Foundation, a separate entity that does not appear to be a grantee orotherwise have any business dealings with the NIH. Moreover, although the recipient is expected to give a lecture (at a symposium, and in addition to acceptance remarksduring the presentation ceremony), the Dan David Prize appears to be a bona fide award made as part of an establishedprogram of recognition that an NIH employee, including Dr. Collins, might be permitted to accept (assuming no change inthe program or other individualized issue).  Again , the award appears to be from the Dan David Foundation.  I have foundno record of any business interactions between NIH and the Dan David Foundation, so OGE’s source limitation is not anissue.  Although there is a symposium at which the recipients are expected to give a presentation, I have been told theyReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
give talks about their work over the course of their careers, rather than current science and theory, and $1 million is faroutside of the range of typical honoraria paid for individual presentations.  From videos available on the internet (at sitesnot presently blocked by NIH security measures), it appears that the Prize ceremony is quite elaborate, well-attended, andin keeping with what we expect such an event to “look like.”  Press reports that coincide with the announcement of eachyear’s winners appear to reflect that this is a significant award/honor.   Gretchen H. Weaver, J.D.Supervisory/Senior NIH Ethics CounselDHHS/OGC/Ethics Divisionphone: fax:  NOTICE:  THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), ETHICS DIVISION IS INTENDED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S)NAMES ABOVE AND MAY CONTAIN PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT SHOULD NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO UNAUTHORIZED ADDRESSEES. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR,PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.  EMPLOYEE RECIPIENTS ARE COUNSELED THAT DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR VIOLATING FEDERALETHICS REGULATIONS MAY NOT BE TAKEN AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE WHO HAS ENGAGED IN CONDUCT IN GOOD FAITH RELIANCE UPON THE PRIOR ADVICE OF ANYAGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL, PROVIDED THAT THE EMPLOYEE HAS MADE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES.  IF EMPLOYEE CONDUCT IS POTENTIALLYSUBJECT TO CRIMINAL SANCTIONS UNDER CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND RELATED STATUTES, RELIANCE OF THE ADVICE OF AN AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL ININTERPRETING THE SCOPE OF SUCH STATUTES IS A FACTOR THAT MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN EXERCISING PROSECUTORIALDISCRETION.  EMPLOYEES ARE CAUTIONED THAT DISCLOSURES TO AN OGC ATTORNEY ARE NOT PROTTECTED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT BY ATTORNEY-CLIENTPRIVILEGE.  ALL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING AGENCY ATTORNEYS, ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS TO THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. From: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] @od.nih.gov>Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 2:16 PMTo: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E] < @od.nih.gov>Subject: FW: Dan David Prize My quick thoughts From: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 11:40 AMTo: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Cc: Schwetz, Tara (NIH/OD) [E] @nih.gov>Subject: Dan David Prize I’m lost as to what Tony wants you to raise with HHS at this VERY early time.  It’s not a pending HHS matter yet, thoughonce we transmit the package, HHS could be helpful in telling OGC that this is a top priority (and not clearing otherOPDIVs’ appointees).  NEO needs time to assemble the package.  From a quick review of the website, I know we’ll need to contact the awardsponsor for additional information.  For example:     Laureates in each selected field are chosen by the Dan David Prize Board, based on the recommendations ofInternational Review Committees comprised of world-renowned experts in the relevant fields.  Will need to confirmthat both the Review Committee and the DD Board used written selection criteria, either the same or different.  Alsoneed to know who makes up the Committee and Board (so can likely prove both are independent of Tel Aviv U.) Nomination requirements include:  “A detailed description of the nominee’s work (1-2 pages), stipulating reasonswhy the nominee merits the Dan David Prize. Reference should be made to the importance of the work, its impactand its projected influence in the relevant field.”  Might be able to use “importance of the work, its impact and itsprojected influence in the relevant field,” are selection criteria.  Would need sponsor to confirm that selections arebased on these factors. Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Prize winners are required to participate in the Award Ceremony and the Attendant Events.  Will need to know whatthe details of the Award Ceremony and get a list of the Attendant Events.  From the website, seems attendant eventsinclude a symposia. Also, we need clarification of Tel Aviv University’s involvement.  The University’s involvement could be consequential ifNIAID has any projects with it.  My guess is that the University is NOT involved in the recipient selection process; itappears to host the symposia.  The latter involvement likely will not affect the determination.  How can I help? Holli Beckerman JaffeDirector, NIH Ethics Office @od.nih.gov Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
To clarify: NAM is pending with Gretchen.  Once Randy gets it, he may agree with us and then there is no need for it to go to OGE. Marilyn gave us comments on AAAS on Jan 7.  We asked AAAS for more information on Jan 12, and pinged them on Jan27.     CDC will go to OGC on Monday and it will be approved.  (I misspoke before.  We needed something from NIAID prior toforwarding the package to OGC, and we got that today.)  Dan David was reviewed in 2011 (Gretchen sent me the attached email), so if we can confirm a few things with Dan David– it’s very likely we can, that should be approved too.  Re: GA Tech and Vanderbilt, we’re in agreement that those are closed?  Tony was told that he could not receive the moneyfrom GA Tech.  He has not been told our conclusion re:  Vanderbilt.  (I attempted that in my draft status email thismorning.)  I briefly discussed both awards with Gretchen and she also agrees, but has not seen the paperwork.  Heragreement was based on their grantee status. If you still want to go to HHS, pls see below. From: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 1:36 PMTo: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Cc: Schwetz, Tara (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Subject: Draft for your reviewImportance: High Draft -  let me know what you think. I would send to HHS C-O-S, his counselor Dawn O’Connell, and Anne Reid. With apologies for adding to your very full plate. I am writing to you in my role as NIH Deputy Ethics Counselor to ask forhelp in expediting OGC’s review of a number of awards for Dr. Anthony Fauci. I am told (and appreciate) that OGC staff are now working on ethics clearance for new appointees, but several awardsneed (or soon will need) OGC’s attention. Given the visibility of Dr. Fauci and the visibility of these prestigious awards it isbecoming increasing uncomfortable for him to explain why no decision has been reached. This will be furthercompounded by the latest award that Dr. Fauci has been notified about (the Dan David prize from Israel) which they wishto announce on Feb 15. To be clear, Dr. Fauci knows he can accept the honor of these awards, but each also comes with asignificant monetary award. The sponsors are eager for information as to whether he can accept the cash prizes.  [Tony’sassistant routinely tells the sponsors as soon as NIAID is notified that Tony is an award recipient that the cash prizes needheighten review.  And we don’t just want to say no; we want to try to get to yes.  Yes takes time.] Would it be possible to elevate the priority of the review of these awards by OGC please:National Academy of Medicine Gustav O. Lienhard awardCDC Foundation Fries Prize AAAS Philip Abelson PrizeThe Dan David Prize lat    Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>To:"Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>Cc:"Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @OD.NIH.GOV>Subject:RE: Update on awardsDate:Sat, 30 Jan 2021 11:18:01 -0500Importance:NormalLarry:    Thanks for the note and many thanks to Holli for the effort she has put in.   I understand completely aboutthe Vanderbilt and Georgia Institute of Technology.   I was not expecting to be able to accept the cash on these.I will accept the honor and they can give the cash to charities of their choosing.   I am very pleased to hearabout the “good” news, particularly about the Dan David Prize.   I knew that we had previously (2011) reviewedit favorably and when I spoke to the Israeli person who informed me of the Award, he mentioned thateverything was the same with this award as it was for the past 20 years, and so I am certain that nothing haschanged, but you can check this.   I told them that I will accept the award.   They want to keep this confidential,but they will announce it to the world on February 15.   I will send  the official invitation to Holli as soon as Ireceive it in the mail.   I really appreciate you and Holli helping out on this.Best regards,Tony From: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2021 10:53 AMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Cc: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] @od.nih.gov>Subject: Update on awards Tony, I certainly understand your frustration about the time that it has taken to reach decisions on a number of awards thathave been pending for too long. I too am frustrated because my goal is to support you in the strongest possible way. I hadextensive discussions with Holli Friday, and as we unpacked things, I realized that more progress has been made than Iwas aware of. Here is the current status of each award: First the good news:Partnership for Public Service’s Service to America Award – approved. Smithsonian Institution’s Great American Medal Gold Medal – approved.The Dan David Prize – Holli raised this prize with Gretchen (HHS OGC) yesterday and Gretchen shared thatthe Dan David Prize was reviewed in 2011 and it was determined to meet the regulatory requirements. Weneed to confirm that certain aspects of the award have not changed since 2011 – Holli’s quick review ofwebsite does not show any changes – and then most likely, you will be able to receive the cash prize. Pleaseforward to Holli the letter notifying you of your selection, and any other written materials you receive fromDan David as soon as you receive them.  CDC Foundation’s Fries Prize – this package is complete and will be transmitted to HHS OGC for final reviewon Monday. We expect a quick approval. As you may know, Harvey Alter received this prize in 2015 and hewas approved to accept the cash prize. AAAS’ Philip Abelson Prize – HHS OGC reviewed the package and requested that we ask AAAS for additionalinformation. Our request for the supplemental documentation is pending with AAAS. We will remind AAASof this need this week, and I remain hopeful that this award will ultimately be approved. It will, however,take more time to get a final decision.Next, the unknown:Released by Chairman Rand Paul
NAM’s Gustov Lienhard Award – this is the most challenging package. After receiving additional informationfrom NAM (I personally made the request to Victor in November), the completed package was submitted toHHS OGC in December. They determined that you cannot receive the cash prize based on a broad reading ofan applicable regulation. We propose to appeal that interpretation to the US Office of Government Ethics(OGE) but we have arrived at a strategy that we think maximizes our chance at succeeding. We think ourargument is reasonable, but the USG OGE still may reject it if they take a more conservative approach. Ifthey do, we have no other recourse.  In addition, the USG OGE is neck deep in vetting appointments for thenew administration and once it gets to USG OGE it may get hung up for some time. So to get “two turns atbat”, we are first trying to convince the acting HHS OGC DAEO, Randy Hall, who serves as the HHS’ subjectmatter expert and is the POC for the USG OGE, to agree to our interpretation. If he does it won’t have to goto the USG OGE. If he doesn’t, we can still appeal directly to the USG OGE as a final attempt. Now the bad news:Vanderbilt University’s Nichols-Chancellor Medal and GA Institute of Technology’s Ivan Allen Jr. Prize forSocial Courage – unfortunately, you will not be able to accept the cash prizes associated with either of theseawards because both award sponsors (Vanderbilt and GA Tech) are NIAID grantees. We did consider askingfor an exception for these awards; however, neither award appears to comport with the exception forawards which “confer an exceptionally high honor in the fields of medicine or scientific research.” Vanderbilt’s Nichols-Chancellor’s Medal is awarded “to those persons who define the 21st centuryand exemplify the best qualities of the human spirit.” Previous winners were Caroline Kennedy, VenusWilliams, Amal Clooney and Ken Burns.GA Tech’s Ivan Allen Jr. Prize for Social Courage “shines a light on those around the world who bravelyact to improve the human condition, often in the face of seemingly insurmountablechallenges.” Previous winners were Hamilton E. Homes and Charlayne Hunter-Gault, Andrew Youngand Jimmy and Rosalynn CarterAs neither award focuses on achievements in medicine or scientific research we must unfortunately denythe request to accept these awards’ cash prizes. As you know you can accept the honor of being theseawards’ 2021 recipients, and I understand that you are proceeding along those lines. Also, the awardsponsors may donate the cash prizes in your honor to charities of their choosing. I understand GA Tech isproceeding with such a designation and we will inform Vanderbilt of that option.  Holli plays the seminal role in assembling of the award packages, drafting follow-up correspondence with the awardsponsors, and legal discussions with OGC. She will continue to monitor the developments with respect to each packageand keep me informed of any change in status.  Please let me know if you have any questions. Larry  Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>To:"Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @OD.NIH.GOV>, "Tabak, Lawrence(NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>Cc:"Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject:RE: Update on awardsDate:Sun, 31 Jan 2021 08:45:23 -0500Importance:NormalThanks, Holli! From: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] < @od.nih.gov>Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2021 8:30 AMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>; Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Subject: RE: Update on awards Good morning, Late Friday we received a response from AAAS regarding the Abelson Prize.  My staff sent the additional information toOGC last evening, and I sent a follow-up email this morning.  I expect a decision on this award shortly, and I remainoptimistic that it will be a positive outcome. Holli From: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2021 11:18 AMTo: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Cc: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Subject: RE: Update on awards Larry:    Thanks for the note and many thanks to Holli for the effort she has put in.   I understand completely aboutthe Vanderbilt and Georgia Institute of Technology.   I was not expecting to be able to accept the cash on these.I will accept the honor and they can give the cash to charities of their choosing.   I am very pleased to hearabout the “good” news, particularly about the Dan David Prize.   I knew that we had previously (2011) reviewedit favorably and when I spoke to the Israeli person who informed me of the Award, he mentioned thateverything was the same with this award as it was for the past 20 years, and so I am certain that nothing haschanged, but you can check this.   I told them that I will accept the award.   They want to keep this confidential,but they will announce it to the world on February 15.   I will send  the official invitation to Holli as soon as Ireceive it in the mail.   I really appreciate you and Holli helping out on this.Best regards,Tony From: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2021 10:53 AMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Cc: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Subject: Update on awards Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Tony, I certainly understand your frustration about the time that it has taken to reach decisions on a number of awards thathave been pending for too long. I too am frustrated because my goal is to support you in the strongest possible way. I hadextensive discussions with Holli Friday, and as we unpacked things, I realized that more progress has been made than Iwas aware of. Here is the current status of each award: First the good news:Partnership for Public Service’s Service to America Award – approved. Smithsonian Institution’s Great American Medal Gold Medal – approved.The Dan David Prize – Holli raised this prize with Gretchen (HHS OGC) yesterday and Gretchen shared thatthe Dan David Prize was reviewed in 2011 and it was determined to meet the regulatory requirements. Weneed to confirm that certain aspects of the award have not changed since 2011 – Holli’s quick review ofwebsite does not show any changes – and then most likely, you will be able to receive the cash prize. Pleaseforward to Holli the letter notifying you of your selection, and any other written materials you receive fromDan David as soon as you receive them.  CDC Foundation’s Fries Prize – this package is complete and will be transmitted to HHS OGC for final reviewon Monday. We expect a quick approval. As you may know, Harvey Alter received this prize in 2015 and hewas approved to accept the cash prize. AAAS’ Philip Abelson Prize – HHS OGC reviewed the package and requested that we ask AAAS for additionalinformation. Our request for the supplemental documentation is pending with AAAS. We will remind AAASof this need this week, and I remain hopeful that this award will ultimately be approved. It will, however,take more time to get a final decision.Next, the unknown:NAM’s Gustov Lienhard Award – this is the most challenging package. After receiving additional informationfrom NAM (I personally made the request to Victor in November), the completed package was submitted toHHS OGC in December. They determined that you cannot receive the cash prize based on a broad reading ofan applicable regulation. We propose to appeal that interpretation to the US Office of Government Ethics(OGE) but we have arrived at a strategy that we think maximizes our chance at succeeding. We think ourargument is reasonable, but the USG OGE still may reject it if they take a more conservative approach. Ifthey do, we have no other recourse.  In addition, the USG OGE is neck deep in vetting appointments for thenew administration and once it gets to USG OGE it may get hung up for some time. So to get “two turns atbat”, we are first trying to convince the acting HHS OGC DAEO, Randy Hall, who serves as the HHS’ subjectmatter expert and is the POC for the USG OGE, to agree to our interpretation. If he does it won’t have to goto the USG OGE. If he doesn’t, we can still appeal directly to the USG OGE as a final attempt. Now the bad news:Vanderbilt University’s Nichols-Chancellor Medal and GA Institute of Technology’s Ivan Allen Jr. Prize forSocial Courage – unfortunately, you will not be able to accept the cash prizes associated with either of theseawards because both award sponsors (Vanderbilt and GA Tech) are NIAID grantees. We did consider askingfor an exception for these awards; however, neither award appears to comport with the exception forawards which “confer an exceptionally high honor in the fields of medicine or scientific research.” Vanderbilt’s Nichols-Chancellor’s Medal is awarded “to those persons who define the 21st centuryand exemplify the best qualities of the human spirit.” Previous winners were Caroline Kennedy, VenusWilliams, Amal Clooney and Ken Burns.GA Tech’s Ivan Allen Jr. Prize for Social Courage “shines a light on those around the world who bravelyact to improve the human condition, often in the face of seemingly insurmountablechallenges.” Previous winners were Hamilton E. Homes and Charlayne Hunter-Gault, Andrew Youngand Jimmy and Rosalynn CarterAs neither award focuses on achievements in medicine or scientific research we must unfortunately denythe request to accept these awards’ cash prizes. As you know you can accept the honor of being theseawards’ 2021 recipients, and I understand that you are proceeding along those lines. Also, the awardsponsors may donate the cash prizes in your honor to charities of their choosing. I understand GA Tech isproceeding with such a designation and we will inform Vanderbilt of that option.  Holli plays the seminal role in assembling of the award packages, drafting follow-up correspondence with the awardsponsors, and legal discussions with OGC. She will continue to monitor the developments with respect to each packageReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
and keep me informed of any change in status.  Please let me know if you have any questions. Larry  Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>To:"Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @OD.NIH.GOV>Cc:"Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>, "Conrad, Patricia(NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>, "Billet, Courtney (NIH/NIAID) [E]"< @niaid.nih.gov>Subject:FW: Dan David PrizeDate:Sun, 31 Jan 2021 08:44:45 -0500Importance:NormalAttachments:AnthonyFauci.pdfHolli:     I just received the official notification of my winning the Dan David Prize (see attached).   As you can see,they will be announcing it on February 15.   Larry asked me to forward this to you as soon as I received it so thatyou can proceed with the official clearance.   Many thanks.Best regards,Tony From: Charlotte Halle @tauex.tau.ac.il>Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2021 4:39 AMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Cc: Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Dan David Prize Dear Dr. Fauci, Attached please find the notification letter informing you that you have been selected as a 2021 Dan David PrizeLaureate. The original letter will be sent to you by post. Please confirm receipt of this email. Best wishes, Charlotte Hallé   Charlotte HalléDirectorDan David PrizeOffice: Mobile: Email: @tauex.tau.ac.ilWebsite: www.dandavidprize.org  Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @od.nih.gov>To:"Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>Subject:RE: Dan David PrizeDate:Sun, 31 Jan 2021 16:18:06 -0500Importance:NormalYes, thankfully.  I’ll contact Gretchen tomorrow on Dan David to clarify what we need from the organization.  I want tokeep this package moving. From: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2021 9:27 AMTo: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] < @od.nih.gov>Subject: Re: Dan David Prize We appear to be back to a more normal approach From: "Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" <@od.nih.gov>Date: Sunday, January 31, 2021 at 9:05 AMTo: Anthony Fauci <@niaid.nih.gov>Cc: "Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>, "Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E]"<@niaid.nih.gov>, "Billet, Courtney (NIH/NIAID) [E]" <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: RE: Dan David Prize Thanks Tony, and congratulations on this tremendous honor.  Please also forward the invitations to the Prize’s online eventsonce you receive them, and any other correspondence you receive from Dan David. I will share this confidential information with OGC, and proceed to process the award.  As Larry noted, the analysis for theaward was completed several years ago, so do not expect any difficulties with reviewing and approving your awardpackage.  I’ll keep you posted on our developments. Holli From: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2021 8:45 AMTo: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Cc: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>; Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>;Billet, Courtney (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: FW: Dan David Prize Holli:     I just received the official notification of my winning the Dan David Prize (see attached).   As you can see,they will be announcing it on February 15.   Larry asked me to forward this to you as soon as I received it so thatyou can proceed with the official clearance.   Many thanks.Best regards,Tony Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From: Charlotte Halle <@tauex.tau.ac.il>Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2021 4:39 AMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Cc: Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Dan David Prize Dear Dr. Fauci, Attached please find the notification letter informing you that you have been selected as a 2021 Dan David PrizeLaureate. The original letter will be sent to you by post. Please confirm receipt of this email. Best wishes, Charlotte Hallé   Charlotte HalléDirectorDan David PrizeOffice: Mobile: Email: @tauex.tau.ac.ilWebsite: www.dandavidprize.org  Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>To:"Charlotte Halle" < @tauex.tau.ac.il>Cc:"Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>, "Dan David Prize"< @tauex.tau.ac.il>, "Billet, Courtney (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>,"Greg Folkers (@niaid.nih.gov)" <@niaid.nih.gov>, "Jaffe, HolliBeckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @OD.NIH.GOV>Subject:RE: Dan David PrizeDate:Mon, 01 Feb 2021 21:29:30 -0500Importance:NormalCharlotte:   I will accept the 2021 Dan David Prize.   My Chief-of-Staff, Greg Folkers (copied here)  will provide you with theinformation that you have requested below.   The people in my Institute who can assist you with PR matters areCourtney Billet and Patricia Conrad, both of whom are copied on this e-mail.  Please let me  know if you haveany questions.  Many thanks.Best regards,TonyAnthony S. Fauci, MDDirectorNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of HealthBethesda, MD Phone: FAX: E-mail: @niaid.nih.govThe information in this e-mail and any of its attachments is confidential and may contain sensitive information.  Itshould not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient.  If you have received this e-mail in errorplease inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage devices.  The National Institute ofAllergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) shall not accept liability for any statements made that are the sender'sown and not expressly made on behalf of the NIAID by one of its representatives.    From: Charlotte Halle < @tauex.tau.ac.il>Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 4:01 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Cc: Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>; Dan David Prize < @tauex.tau.ac.il>Subject: FW: Dan David Prize Dear Dr. Fauci, We keenly await confirmation that you will accept the 2021 Dan David Prize. In the meantime, we write to you with some urgent requests regarding the announcement of the 2021 DanDavid Prize laureates, scheduled for Monday February 15 at 1800 (Israel-time); in parallel we plan to notify theinternational and Israeli media that you are among those honored. Should we be in touch directly with someone else regarding these requests?   We ask that within 2 days, you send us the following:Released by Chairman Rand Paul
 1)    A high resolution photo (at least 1 MB in size; it will be blown up and printed in a large format so thequality of the photo is key). If you can send more than one option, that would be best. Please indicate ifthe photo requires a credit. 2)    A short bio in layman’s terms. 3)    A short paragraph about your work and significant achievements, in laymen’s terms. 4)    A quote from you of up to two paragraphs in length, which includes a statement of reaction to yourselection. Alternatively We would be happy to telephone you for a brief conversation to ask you a couple of questions, includingabout your reaction to being selected. If you prefer this, please send us your telephone number and atime you can be reached over the next few days. 5)    Additionally we ask you to provide us with the name and contact information of a professional at yourinstitution who can assist us with PR matters. I will also mention that your photograph is the most urgent item on this list for us. Thank you very much in advance for your cooperation and we look forward to further contact. Yours sincerely, Charlotte Charlotte HalléDirectorDan David PrizeOffice: Mobile: Email: @tauex.tau.ac.ilWebsite: www.dandavidprize.org   From: Charlotte HalleSent: Sunday, January 31, 2021 11:39 AMTo: ' @niaid.nih.gov' <@niaid.nih.gov>Cc: ' @niaid.nih.gov' <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Dan David Prize Dear Dr. Fauci, Attached please find the notification letter informing you that you have been selected as a 2021 Dan David PrizeLaureate. The original letter will be sent to you by post. Please confirm receipt of this email. Best wishes, Charlotte Hallé Released by Chairman Rand Paul
  Charlotte HalléDirectorDan David PrizeOffice: Mobile: Email: @tauex.tau.ac.ilWebsite: www.dandavidprize.org  Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E]" < @od.nih.gov>To:"Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>Cc:"Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @od.nih.gov>, "Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC)"< @hhs.gov>Subject:RE: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. FauciDate:Tue, 16 Feb 2021 11:01:52 -0500Importance:NormalWith apologies; I meant “now,” not “not.” Gretchen Gretchen H. Weaver, J.D.Supervisory/Senior NIH Ethics CounselDHHS/OGC/Ethics Divisionphone: fax:  NOTICE:  THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), ETHICS DIVISION IS INTENDED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S)NAMES ABOVE AND MAY CONTAIN PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT SHOULD NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO UNAUTHORIZED ADDRESSEES. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR,PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.  EMPLOYEE RECIPIENTS ARE COUNSELED THAT DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR VIOLATING FEDERALETHICS REGULATIONS MAY NOT BE TAKEN AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE WHO HAS ENGAGED IN CONDUCT IN GOOD FAITH RELIANCE UPON THE PRIOR ADVICE OF ANYAGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL, PROVIDED THAT THE EMPLOYEE HAS MADE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES.  IF EMPLOYEE CONDUCT IS POTENTIALLYSUBJECT TO CRIMINAL SANCTIONS UNDER CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND RELATED STATUTES, RELIANCE OF THE ADVICE OF AN AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL ININTERPRETING THE SCOPE OF SUCH STATUTES IS A FACTOR THAT MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN EXERCISING PROSECUTORIALDISCRETION.  EMPLOYEES ARE CAUTIONED THAT DISCLOSURES TO AN OGC ATTORNEY ARE NOT PROTTECTED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT BY ATTORNEY-CLIENTPRIVILEGE.  ALL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING AGENCY ATTORNEYS, ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS TO THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. From: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E]Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 10:46 AMTo: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Cc: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] < @OD.NIH.GOV>; Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC) ( @hhs.gov)< @hhs.gov>Subject: RE: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Dr. Tabak: Good morning.  As a quick update on the status of this item, Randy and I talked and we have forwarded your note to OGEwith a request that they consider the questions presented.  We will keep you apprised of what we hear.  That said, wehave no idea when to expect a response given that OGE is heavily involved in working to bring the Biden team memberson board across the entire Executive Branch.  We will, however, be checking in. I am not turning to focus on the Dan David Prize. Best, Gretchen Gretchen H. Weaver, J.D.Supervisory/Senior NIH Ethics CounselDHHS/OGC/Ethics DivisionReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
phone: fax: NOTICE:  THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), ETHICS DIVISION IS INTENDED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S)NAMES ABOVE AND MAY CONTAIN PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT SHOULD NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO UNAUTHORIZED ADDRESSEES. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR,PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.  EMPLOYEE RECIPIENTS ARE COUNSELED THAT DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR VIOLATING FEDERALETHICS REGULATIONS MAY NOT BE TAKEN AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE WHO HAS ENGAGED IN CONDUCT IN GOOD FAITH RELIANCE UPON THE PRIOR ADVICE OF ANYAGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL, PROVIDED THAT THE EMPLOYEE HAS MADE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES.  IF EMPLOYEE CONDUCT IS POTENTIALLYSUBJECT TO CRIMINAL SANCTIONS UNDER CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND RELATED STATUTES, RELIANCE OF THE ADVICE OF AN AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL ININTERPRETING THE SCOPE OF SUCH STATUTES IS A FACTOR THAT MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN EXERCISING PROSECUTORIALDISCRETION.  EMPLOYEES ARE CAUTIONED THAT DISCLOSURES TO AN OGC ATTORNEY ARE NOT PROTTECTED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT BY ATTORNEY-CLIENTPRIVILEGE.  ALL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING AGENCY ATTORNEYS, ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS TO THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. From: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 5:51 AMTo: Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC) <@HHS.GOV>Cc: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>; Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Subject: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Mr. Hall, I write to request your concurrence that the exception to the gift prohibition at section 2635.204(d) does not prohibit Dr.Anthony Fauci from accepting the cash prize associated with the National Academy of Medicine’s (NAM) 2020 Gustav O.Lienhard Award.  Specifically, I ask you to find that: 1) the National Academies of Sciences (NAS), the umbrellaorganization under which NAM was established, is not a “person” under the regulations, and similarly, neither is NAM; or2) if NAS is a “person,” NAM and NAS are different “persons” because of NAM’s independence from NAS; and/or 3) NAS isnot a “person who can be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of [Dr. Fauci’s NIH] duties.”  If youdo not concur, I ask that you forward this discussion to the Office of Government Ethics for their consideration anddetermination of the applicability of the gift rule to the NAM Lienhard Award. As you likely know, Dr. Fauci is the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).  He wasawarded the Lienhard award from NAM on October 19, 2020.  The Lienhard award – a medal and $40,000 – recognizesindividuals for outstanding achievement in improving health care services in the United States.  NIAID currently funds twoCongressionally-mandated studies as well as six other projects including an Action Collaborative, a Board, two Forums anda Roundtable.  NIAID contributes to the latter projects typically as one of several NIH Institutes and Centers.  It is ourunderstanding that due to a restructuring of NAS, all the business interactions between the Academies and Federalagencies go through NAS.  Thus, NIAID has no current financial, contractual, or similar dealings with NAM.  In order for Dr. Fauci to accept the cash prize, we reviewed the exception to the gift rules for meritorious public service orachievement at section 2635.204(d) (emphasis added): (1) An employee may accept a bona fide award for meritorious public service or achievement and any itemincident to the award, provided that: (i) The award and any item incident to the award are not from a person who has interests that may besubstantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of the employee's official duties, or froman association or other organization if a majority of its members have such interests; The definition of “person” is found at section 2635.102(k) and is:  (k) Person means an individual, corporation and subsidiaries it controls, company, association, firm, partnership,society, joint stock company, or any other organization or institution, including any officer, employee, or agent ofsuch person or entity. For purposes of this part, a corporation will be deemed to control a subsidiary if it owns 50percent or more of the subsidiary's voting securities. The term is all-inclusive and applies to commercial venturesand nonprofit organizations as well as to foreign, State, and local governments, including the Government of theReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
District of Columbia. It does not include any agency or other entity of the Federal Government or any officer oremployee thereof when acting in his official capacity on behalf of that agency or entity. The “National Academy of Sciences (in this chapter, the “corporation”) is a federally chartered corporation.”  36 USC §150301.  Pursuant to its Mission statement, NAS “is a private, non-profit society [and is] charged with providingindependent, objective advice to the nation on matters related to science and technology.”  The Act to Incorporate theNational Academy of Sciences (aka the Academy Charter) states “the Academy shall, whenever called upon by anydepartment of the Government, investigate, examine, experiment, and report upon any subject of science or art . . . .” Academy Charter at §3. While a corporation is a “person” under section 2635.102(k), I argue that the type of corporationthat NAS is – a federally chartered corporation, with its exceptional mission to advise the Federal Government – is not thetype of corporation that OGE intended to include in the definition.  First, OGE could have, but did not include in thedefinition of “person” any discussion of federally chartered corporations, perhaps because of their uniqueness.  And it’sthis uniqueness which makes the application of section 2635.204(d) unnecessary.  NIAID works with NAS because it isdirected to do so by Congress and because NAS offers NIAID an expertise that cannot be found elsewhere.  NAM did not“return the favor” to NIAID when it selected Dr. Fauci as its 2021 Lienhard awardee.  Its relationship with NIAID is rootedin legislation and will continue regardless of an unrelated award to NIAID’s Director. Last, OGE stated that “[‘person’] doesnot include any agency or other entity of the Federal Government . . . .”  I concede that NAS is not a part of the FederalGovernment.  However, in 1997, Congress amended the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) to include the NationalAcademy of Sciences under some of FACA’s provisions.  See Congressional Research Service report, CongressionallyChartered Nonprofit Organizations ("Title 36 Corporations"): What They Are and How Congress Treats Them (July 14,2008).  There, CSR noted that the FACA amendment was: [T]he first instance in which Congress has made [federally chartered corporations] subject to the provisions of ageneral management law, and while the action may be supportable on public policy grounds, it does, to theextent of the applicable provisions, diminish the private character of the affected organizations.  As such, itconstitutes a precedent with implications. CSR Report at 7.  FACA’s partial application to NAS further supports viewing NAS as a different kind of corporate entity thatis outside of the regulatory definition of “person.”  Therefore, if NAS is not a “person,” NAS’ non-person status extends toNAM, an entity established under NAS’ charter.  Consequently, the pending NIAID-NAS matters do not make a gift fromNAM a prohibited gift for Dr. Fauci under the applicable regulations.   In the alternative, if you find NAS to be a “person” under 2635.102(k), then you should not find it to be the same “person”as NAM.  Even though NAM was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, the definitionof “person” supports a finding that NAM is not a subsidiary of corporate parent NAS.  The regulation explains that “forpurposes of [Part 2635], a corporation will be deemed to control a subsidiary if it owns 50 percent or more of thesubsidiary's voting securities.”  NAM does not issue voting securities, so NAS cannot control such securities; accordingly,NAM is not a subsidiary of NAS, but rather an independent entity.  Furthermore, pursuant to NAM’s Articles ofOrganization (AoO), adopted May 19, 2015 (copy attached), “the governance of [NAM] shall reside in the President andCouncil to be elected from among the membership,” AoO Art. III, § 1, “NAM shall be solely responsible for the content ofreports on projects that it undertakes, and such reports may be issued in its own name.”  AoO Art. VI, § 2.  NAM’sgoverning documents repeatedly show NAM’s independence from NAS.  Last, NAM’s AoO gives it its own authority toestablish awards.  AoO Art. V.  Thus, the Lienhard award and its associated cash prize are from NAM and NIAID’scommissioned studies and other projects from NAS do not make the award an impermissible gift under section2635.204(d).    Finally, if NAS and NAM are a “person,” then they are not persons who are substantially affected by the performance ornonperformance of Dr. Fauci’s duties because both “compensation” in NAS’ charter as well as “substantially” in section2635.204(d) must have meaning.  NAS’ charter states:  “[NAS] shall receive no compensation whatever for any services tothe Government of the United States.”  This is consistent with NAS’ status as a not-for-profit entity. NAS’ charter wascodified in Title 36 at Sections 150301-150304, and Section 150303 reiterates that NAS “may not receive compensationfor services to the Government, but the actual expense of the investigation, examination, experimentation, and reportshall be paid by the Government from an appropriation for that purpose.”  If the statutory language means that NAScannot receive any compensation for its investigations, examinations, experiments or reports commissioned by FederalReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
agencies, but rather only reimbursement of expenses, then NAS is not substantially affected by NIAID’s projects. Furthermore, two of NIAID’s projects with NAS were mandated by Congress.  One project was started by another NIHInstitute which NIAID later joined.  Other collaborations were formed at the agency or department level, and not from thedirect action of NIAID.  Most importantly, every NAS project in which NIAID is involved is a large-scale project withnumerous members.  Being one of many means that NIAID’s proportional contribution does not affect NAS substantially. For all of these reasons, Dr. Fauci would not be accepting an award from a person (NAS and/or NAM) who has interestthat may be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of his official duties.  For the reasons provided above, a finding should be made that Dr. Fauci may accept the Lienhard Award and the cashprize associated with it from NAM.  If you have any questions, please contact Holli Beckerman Jaffe, cc’d above. Thank you for your consideration. With best wishes,Larry Lawrence A. Tabak, DDS, PhDPrincipal Deputy Director, NIHDeputy Ethics Counselor, NIHReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Schwetz, Tara (NIH/OD) [E]" < @nih.gov>To:"Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>Subject:Re: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. FauciDate:Fri, 19 Feb 2021 00:58:45 -0500Importance:NormalInline-Images:image001.pngIt was worth a try… Best, Tara A. Schwetz, PhDAssociate Deputy Director, NIHA: P:  | M:
cidimage001.png@01D639B9.FBF92330 From: Larry Tabak <@nih.gov>Date: Thursday, February 18, 2021 at 6:48 PMTo: Tara Schwetz <@nih.gov>Subject: FW: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Not surprising…but not a good conversation to have with ASF…. From: "Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC)" < @HHS.GOV>Date: Thursday, February 18, 2021 at 4:47 PMTo: "Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>Cc: Gretchen Weaver < @od.nih.gov>Subject: RE: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci  Dr. Tabak: Good afternoon.  This is to let you know that OGE has responded to our request to consider whether the gift ruleexception for awards applies in the case of the Lienhard Award the NAM presented to Dr. Fauci.  Unfortunately, OGE hasconcluded that the NASEM/NAM is/are a “person” under the government-wide rules restricting gifts from outside sourcesand that they are a person that can be “substantially affected by the performance or non-performance” of Dr. Fauci’sduties.  As a result, we are unable to change our prior determination that he cannot accept the $40,000 cash giftassociated with the Lienhard Award. Please let us know if you have any questions. Randy  Randall J. HallActing Associate General Counsel for EthicsReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
Alternate Designated Agency Ethics OfficialEthics DivisionDepartment of Health and Human Services   NOTICE:  THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), ETHICS DIVISION IS INTENDED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S)NAMES ABOVE AND MAY CONTAIN PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT SHOULD NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO UNAUTHORIZED ADDRESSEES. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR,PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.  EMPLOYEE RECIPIENTS ARE COUNSELED THAT DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR VIOLATING FEDERALETHICS REGULATIONS MAY NOT BE TAKEN AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE WHO HAS ENGAGED IN CONDUCT IN GOOD FAITH RELIANCE UPON THE PRIOR ADVICE OF ANYAGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL, PROVIDED THAT THE EMPLOYEE HAS MADE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES.  IF EMPLOYEE CONDUCT IS POTENTIALLYSUBJECT TO CRIMINAL SANCTIONS UNDER CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND RELATED STATUTES, RELIANCE OF THE ADVICE OF AN AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL ININTERPRETING THE SCOPE OF SUCH STATUTES IS A FACTOR THAT MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN EXERCISING PROSECUTORIALDISCRETION.  EMPLOYEES ARE CAUTIONED THAT DISCLOSURES TO AN OGC ATTORNEY ARE NOT PROTTECTED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT BY ATTORNEY-CLIENTPRIVILEGE.  ALL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING AGENCY ATTORNEYS, ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS TO THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. From: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E]Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2021 3:40 PMTo: Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC) (@hhs.gov) <@hhs.gov>Subject: Final note to Dr. Tabak RE: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Randy – Did you want to respond to Dr. Tabak?  I had forgotten that I rote to him on Tuesday to let him know we had sentthe question to OGE (see below).  This is what I would send, but let me know if you want to send and want somethingdifferent.  Thanks, Gretchen  Dr. Tabak: Good afternoon.  It is sooner than I expected, but I am writing because OGE has responded to our request.  Unfortunately,OGE has concluded that the NASEM/NAM is/are a “person” under the government-wide rules restricting gifts fromoutside sources and that they are a person that can be “substantially affected by the performance or non-performance”of Dr. Fauci’s duties.  As a result, we are unable to change our prior determination that he cannot accept the $40,000 cashgift associated with the Lienhard Award. Please let us know if you have any questions.  Gretchen H. Weaver, J.D.Supervisory/Senior NIH Ethics CounselDHHS/OGC/Ethics Divisionphone: fax:  NOTICE:  THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), ETHICS DIVISION IS INTENDED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S)NAMES ABOVE AND MAY CONTAIN PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT SHOULD NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO UNAUTHORIZED ADDRESSEES. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR,PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.  EMPLOYEE RECIPIENTS ARE COUNSELED THAT DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR VIOLATING FEDERALETHICS REGULATIONS MAY NOT BE TAKEN AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE WHO HAS ENGAGED IN CONDUCT IN GOOD FAITH RELIANCE UPON THE PRIOR ADVICE OF ANYAGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL, PROVIDED THAT THE EMPLOYEE HAS MADE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES.  IF EMPLOYEE CONDUCT IS POTENTIALLYSUBJECT TO CRIMINAL SANCTIONS UNDER CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND RELATED STATUTES, RELIANCE OF THE ADVICE OF AN AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL ININTERPRETING THE SCOPE OF SUCH STATUTES IS A FACTOR THAT MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN EXERCISING PROSECUTORIALDISCRETION.  EMPLOYEES ARE CAUTIONED THAT DISCLOSURES TO AN OGC ATTORNEY ARE NOT PROTTECTED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT BY ATTORNEY-CLIENTPRIVILEGE.  ALL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING AGENCY ATTORNEYS, ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS TO THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. From: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E]Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 10:46 AMTo: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Cc: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@OD.NIH.GOV>; Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC) (@hhs.gov)<@hhs.gov>Subject: RE: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Dr. Tabak: Good morning.  As a quick update on the status of this item, Randy and I talked and we have forwarded your note to OGEwith a request that they consider the questions presented.  We will keep you apprised of what we hear.  That said, wehave no idea when to expect a response given that OGE is heavily involved in working to bring the Biden team memberson board across the entire Executive Branch.  We will, however, be checking in. I am not turning to focus on the Dan David Prize. Best, Gretchen Gretchen H. Weaver, J.D.Supervisory/Senior NIH Ethics CounselDHHS/OGC/Ethics Divisionphone: fax:  NOTICE:  THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), ETHICS DIVISION IS INTENDED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S)NAMES ABOVE AND MAY CONTAIN PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT SHOULD NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO UNAUTHORIZED ADDRESSEES. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR,PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.  EMPLOYEE RECIPIENTS ARE COUNSELED THAT DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR VIOLATING FEDERALETHICS REGULATIONS MAY NOT BE TAKEN AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE WHO HAS ENGAGED IN CONDUCT IN GOOD FAITH RELIANCE UPON THE PRIOR ADVICE OF ANYAGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL, PROVIDED THAT THE EMPLOYEE HAS MADE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES.  IF EMPLOYEE CONDUCT IS POTENTIALLYSUBJECT TO CRIMINAL SANCTIONS UNDER CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND RELATED STATUTES, RELIANCE OF THE ADVICE OF AN AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL ININTERPRETING THE SCOPE OF SUCH STATUTES IS A FACTOR THAT MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN EXERCISING PROSECUTORIALDISCRETION.  EMPLOYEES ARE CAUTIONED THAT DISCLOSURES TO AN OGC ATTORNEY ARE NOT PROTTECTED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT BY ATTORNEY-CLIENTPRIVILEGE.  ALL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING AGENCY ATTORNEYS, ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS TO THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. From: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 5:51 AMTo: Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC) <@HHS.GOV>Cc: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>; Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Subject: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Mr. Hall, I write to request your concurrence that the exception to the gift prohibition at section 2635.204(d) does not prohibit Dr.Anthony Fauci from accepting the cash prize associated with the National Academy of Medicine’s (NAM) 2020 Gustav O.Lienhard Award.  Specifically, I ask you to find that: 1) the National Academies of Sciences (NAS), the umbrellaorganization under which NAM was established, is not a “person” under the regulations, and similarly, neither is NAM; or2) if NAS is a “person,” NAM and NAS are different “persons” because of NAM’s independence from NAS; and/or 3) NAS isnot a “person who can be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of [Dr. Fauci’s NIH] duties.”  If youdo not concur, I ask that you forward this discussion to the Office of Government Ethics for their consideration anddetermination of the applicability of the gift rule to the NAM Lienhard Award. As you likely know, Dr. Fauci is the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).  He wasawarded the Lienhard award from NAM on October 19, 2020.  The Lienhard award – a medal and $40,000 – recognizesindividuals for outstanding achievement in improving health care services in the United States.  NIAID currently funds twoCongressionally-mandated studies as well as six other projects including an Action Collaborative, a Board, two Forums anda Roundtable.  NIAID contributes to the latter projects typically as one of several NIH Institutes and Centers.  It is ourReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
understanding that due to a restructuring of NAS, all the business interactions between the Academies and Federalagencies go through NAS.  Thus, NIAID has no current financial, contractual, or similar dealings with NAM.  In order for Dr. Fauci to accept the cash prize, we reviewed the exception to the gift rules for meritorious public service orachievement at section 2635.204(d) (emphasis added): (1) An employee may accept a bona fide award for meritorious public service or achievement and any itemincident to the award, provided that: (i) The award and any item incident to the award are not from a person who has interests that may besubstantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of the employee's official duties, or froman association or other organization if a majority of its members have such interests; The definition of “person” is found at section 2635.102(k) and is:  (k) Person means an individual, corporation and subsidiaries it controls, company, association, firm, partnership,society, joint stock company, or any other organization or institution, including any officer, employee, or agent ofsuch person or entity. For purposes of this part, a corporation will be deemed to control a subsidiary if it owns 50percent or more of the subsidiary's voting securities. The term is all-inclusive and applies to commercial venturesand nonprofit organizations as well as to foreign, State, and local governments, including the Government of theDistrict of Columbia. It does not include any agency or other entity of the Federal Government or any officer oremployee thereof when acting in his official capacity on behalf of that agency or entity. The “National Academy of Sciences (in this chapter, the “corporation”) is a federally chartered corporation.”  36 USC §150301.  Pursuant to its Mission statement, NAS “is a private, non-profit society [and is] charged with providingindependent, objective advice to the nation on matters related to science and technology.”  The Act to Incorporate theNational Academy of Sciences (aka the Academy Charter) states “the Academy shall, whenever called upon by anydepartment of the Government, investigate, examine, experiment, and report upon any subject of science or art . . . .” Academy Charter at §3. While a corporation is a “person” under section 2635.102(k), I argue that the type of corporationthat NAS is – a federally chartered corporation, with its exceptional mission to advise the Federal Government – is not thetype of corporation that OGE intended to include in the definition.  First, OGE could have, but did not include in thedefinition of “person” any discussion of federally chartered corporations, perhaps because of their uniqueness.  And it’sthis uniqueness which makes the application of section 2635.204(d) unnecessary.  NIAID works with NAS because it isdirected to do so by Congress and because NAS offers NIAID an expertise that cannot be found elsewhere.  NAM did not“return the favor” to NIAID when it selected Dr. Fauci as its 2021 Lienhard awardee.  Its relationship with NIAID is rootedin legislation and will continue regardless of an unrelated award to NIAID’s Director. Last, OGE stated that “[‘person’] doesnot include any agency or other entity of the Federal Government . . . .”  I concede that NAS is not a part of the FederalGovernment.  However, in 1997, Congress amended the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) to include the NationalAcademy of Sciences under some of FACA’s provisions.  See Congressional Research Service report, CongressionallyChartered Nonprofit Organizations ("Title 36 Corporations"): What They Are and How Congress Treats Them (July 14,2008).  There, CSR noted that the FACA amendment was: [T]he first instance in which Congress has made [federally chartered corporations] subject to the provisions of ageneral management law, and while the action may be supportable on public policy grounds, it does, to theextent of the applicable provisions, diminish the private character of the affected organizations.  As such, itconstitutes a precedent with implications. CSR Report at 7.  FACA’s partial application to NAS further supports viewing NAS as a different kind of corporate entity thatis outside of the regulatory definition of “person.”  Therefore, if NAS is not a “person,” NAS’ non-person status extends toNAM, an entity established under NAS’ charter.  Consequently, the pending NIAID-NAS matters do not make a gift fromNAM a prohibited gift for Dr. Fauci under the applicable regulations.   In the alternative, if you find NAS to be a “person” under 2635.102(k), then you should not find it to be the same “person”as NAM.  Even though NAM was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, the definitionReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
of “person” supports a finding that NAM is not a subsidiary of corporate parent NAS.  The regulation explains that “forpurposes of [Part 2635], a corporation will be deemed to control a subsidiary if it owns 50 percent or more of thesubsidiary's voting securities.”  NAM does not issue voting securities, so NAS cannot control such securities; accordingly,NAM is not a subsidiary of NAS, but rather an independent entity.  Furthermore, pursuant to NAM’s Articles ofOrganization (AoO), adopted May 19, 2015 (copy attached), “the governance of [NAM] shall reside in the President andCouncil to be elected from among the membership,” AoO Art. III, § 1, “NAM shall be solely responsible for the content ofreports on projects that it undertakes, and such reports may be issued in its own name.”  AoO Art. VI, § 2.  NAM’sgoverning documents repeatedly show NAM’s independence from NAS.  Last, NAM’s AoO gives it its own authority toestablish awards.  AoO Art. V.  Thus, the Lienhard award and its associated cash prize are from NAM and NIAID’scommissioned studies and other projects from NAS do not make the award an impermissible gift under section2635.204(d).    Finally, if NAS and NAM are a “person,” then they are not persons who are substantially affected by the performance ornonperformance of Dr. Fauci’s duties because both “compensation” in NAS’ charter as well as “substantially” in section2635.204(d) must have meaning.  NAS’ charter states:  “[NAS] shall receive no compensation whatever for any services tothe Government of the United States.”  This is consistent with NAS’ status as a not-for-profit entity. NAS’ charter wascodified in Title 36 at Sections 150301-150304, and Section 150303 reiterates that NAS “may not receive compensationfor services to the Government, but the actual expense of the investigation, examination, experimentation, and reportshall be paid by the Government from an appropriation for that purpose.”  If the statutory language means that NAScannot receive any compensation for its investigations, examinations, experiments or reports commissioned by Federalagencies, but rather only reimbursement of expenses, then NAS is not substantially affected by NIAID’s projects. Furthermore, two of NIAID’s projects with NAS were mandated by Congress.  One project was started by another NIHInstitute which NIAID later joined.  Other collaborations were formed at the agency or department level, and not from thedirect action of NIAID.  Most importantly, every NAS project in which NIAID is involved is a large-scale project withnumerous members.  Being one of many means that NIAID’s proportional contribution does not affect NAS substantially. For all of these reasons, Dr. Fauci would not be accepting an award from a person (NAS and/or NAM) who has interestthat may be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of his official duties.  For the reasons provided above, a finding should be made that Dr. Fauci may accept the Lienhard Award and the cashprize associated with it from NAM.  If you have any questions, please contact Holli Beckerman Jaffe, cc’d above. Thank you for your consideration. With best wishes,Larry Lawrence A. Tabak, DDS, PhDPrincipal Deputy Director, NIHDeputy Ethics Counselor, NIHReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @od.nih.gov>To:"Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>Cc:"Schwetz, Tara (NIH/OD) [E]" < @nih.gov>Subject:RE: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. FauciDate:Mon, 22 Feb 2021 16:03:11 -0500Importance:NormalI asked before I wrote you.  No good news, but no bad news either.  Gretchen reviewed the Dan David package and hassome follow up questions about the events surrounding the prize, i.e., award ceremony and symposia.  If they are the sameas in past years (likely yes except this year’s events will be virtual), then approval should be forthcoming.  From: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Sent: Monday, February 22, 2021 3:57 PMTo: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] < @od.nih.gov>Cc: Schwetz, Tara (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Subject: Re: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Yes please.Have we received any good news to temper this with? From: "Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" <@od.nih.gov>Date: Monday, February 22, 2021 at 3:41 PMTo: "Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>Cc: "Schwetz, Tara (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>Subject: FW: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Gretchen shared that OGE disagreed with our argument, and upheld OGC’s determination that Tony cannot receive thecash prize associated with NAM award.  Do you want me to draft an email to Tony for you? From: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Sent: Monday, February 22, 2021 3:27 PMTo: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Subject: FW: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci My apologies; I thought you were copied on Randy’s note to Larry.  Please see below.  I am forwarding the string thatwent. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Gretchen Gretchen H. Weaver, J.D.Supervisory/Senior NIH Ethics CounselDHHS/OGC/Ethics Divisionphone: fax:  Released by Chairman Rand Paul
NOTICE:  THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), ETHICS DIVISION IS INTENDED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S)NAMES ABOVE AND MAY CONTAIN PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT SHOULD NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO UNAUTHORIZED ADDRESSEES. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR,PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.  EMPLOYEE RECIPIENTS ARE COUNSELED THAT DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR VIOLATING FEDERALETHICS REGULATIONS MAY NOT BE TAKEN AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE WHO HAS ENGAGED IN CONDUCT IN GOOD FAITH RELIANCE UPON THE PRIOR ADVICE OF ANYAGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL, PROVIDED THAT THE EMPLOYEE HAS MADE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES.  IF EMPLOYEE CONDUCT IS POTENTIALLYSUBJECT TO CRIMINAL SANCTIONS UNDER CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND RELATED STATUTES, RELIANCE OF THE ADVICE OF AN AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL ININTERPRETING THE SCOPE OF SUCH STATUTES IS A FACTOR THAT MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN EXERCISING PROSECUTORIALDISCRETION.  EMPLOYEES ARE CAUTIONED THAT DISCLOSURES TO AN OGC ATTORNEY ARE NOT PROTTECTED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT BY ATTORNEY-CLIENTPRIVILEGE.  ALL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING AGENCY ATTORNEYS, ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS TO THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. From: Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC) <@hhs.gov>Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2021 4:47 PMTo: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Cc: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Subject: RE: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Dr. Tabak: Good afternoon.  This is to let you know that OGE has responded to our request to consider whether the gift ruleexception for awards applies in the case of the Lienhard Award the NAM presented to Dr. Fauci.  Unfortunately, OGE hasconcluded that the NASEM/NAM is/are a “person” under the government-wide rules restricting gifts from outside sourcesand that they are a person that can be “substantially affected by the performance or non-performance” of Dr. Fauci’sduties.  As a result, we are unable to change our prior determination that he cannot accept the $40,000 cash giftassociated with the Lienhard Award. Please let us know if you have any questions. Randy Randall J. HallActing Associate General Counsel for EthicsAlternate Designated Agency Ethics OfficialEthics DivisionDepartment of Health and Human Services NOTICE:  THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), ETHICS DIVISION IS INTENDED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S)NAMES ABOVE AND MAY CONTAIN PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT SHOULD NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO UNAUTHORIZED ADDRESSEES. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR,PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.  EMPLOYEE RECIPIENTS ARE COUNSELED THAT DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR VIOLATING FEDERALETHICS REGULATIONS MAY NOT BE TAKEN AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE WHO HAS ENGAGED IN CONDUCT IN GOOD FAITH RELIANCE UPON THE PRIOR ADVICE OF ANYAGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL, PROVIDED THAT THE EMPLOYEE HAS MADE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES.  IF EMPLOYEE CONDUCT IS POTENTIALLYSUBJECT TO CRIMINAL SANCTIONS UNDER CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND RELATED STATUTES, RELIANCE OF THE ADVICE OF AN AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL ININTERPRETING THE SCOPE OF SUCH STATUTES IS A FACTOR THAT MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN EXERCISING PROSECUTORIALDISCRETION.  EMPLOYEES ARE CAUTIONED THAT DISCLOSURES TO AN OGC ATTORNEY ARE NOT PROTTECTED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT BY ATTORNEY-CLIENTPRIVILEGE.  ALL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING AGENCY ATTORNEYS, ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS TO THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. From: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E]Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 10:46 AMTo: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Cc: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@OD.NIH.GOV>; Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC) (@hhs.gov)<@hhs.gov>Subject: RE: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Dr. Tabak: Good morning.  As a quick update on the status of this item, Randy and I talked and we have forwarded your note to OGEwith a request that they consider the questions presented.  We will keep you apprised of what we hear.  That said, weReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
have no idea when to expect a response given that OGE is heavily involved in working to bring the Biden team memberson board across the entire Executive Branch.  We will, however, be checking in. I am now turning to focus on the Dan David Prize. Best, Gretchen Gretchen H. Weaver, J.D.Supervisory/Senior NIH Ethics CounselDHHS/OGC/Ethics Divisionphone: fax:  NOTICE:  THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), ETHICS DIVISION IS INTENDED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S)NAMES ABOVE AND MAY CONTAIN PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT SHOULD NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO UNAUTHORIZED ADDRESSEES. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR,PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.  EMPLOYEE RECIPIENTS ARE COUNSELED THAT DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR VIOLATING FEDERALETHICS REGULATIONS MAY NOT BE TAKEN AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE WHO HAS ENGAGED IN CONDUCT IN GOOD FAITH RELIANCE UPON THE PRIOR ADVICE OF ANYAGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL, PROVIDED THAT THE EMPLOYEE HAS MADE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES.  IF EMPLOYEE CONDUCT IS POTENTIALLYSUBJECT TO CRIMINAL SANCTIONS UNDER CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND RELATED STATUTES, RELIANCE OF THE ADVICE OF AN AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL ININTERPRETING THE SCOPE OF SUCH STATUTES IS A FACTOR THAT MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN EXERCISING PROSECUTORIALDISCRETION.  EMPLOYEES ARE CAUTIONED THAT DISCLOSURES TO AN OGC ATTORNEY ARE NOT PROTTECTED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT BY ATTORNEY-CLIENTPRIVILEGE.  ALL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING AGENCY ATTORNEYS, ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS TO THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. From: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 5:51 AMTo: Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC) <@HHS.GOV>Cc: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>; Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Subject: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Mr. Hall, I write to request your concurrence that the exception to the gift prohibition at section 2635.204(d) does not prohibit Dr.Anthony Fauci from accepting the cash prize associated with the National Academy of Medicine’s (NAM) 2020 Gustav O.Lienhard Award.  Specifically, I ask you to find that: 1) the National Academies of Sciences (NAS), the umbrellaorganization under which NAM was established, is not a “person” under the regulations, and similarly, neither is NAM; or2) if NAS is a “person,” NAM and NAS are different “persons” because of NAM’s independence from NAS; and/or 3) NAS isnot a “person who can be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of [Dr. Fauci’s NIH] duties.”  If youdo not concur, I ask that you forward this discussion to the Office of Government Ethics for their consideration anddetermination of the applicability of the gift rule to the NAM Lienhard Award. As you likely know, Dr. Fauci is the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).  He wasawarded the Lienhard award from NAM on October 19, 2020.  The Lienhard award – a medal and $40,000 – recognizesindividuals for outstanding achievement in improving health care services in the United States.  NIAID currently funds twoCongressionally-mandated studies as well as six other projects including an Action Collaborative, a Board, two Forums anda Roundtable.  NIAID contributes to the latter projects typically as one of several NIH Institutes and Centers.  It is ourunderstanding that due to a restructuring of NAS, all the business interactions between the Academies and Federalagencies go through NAS.  Thus, NIAID has no current financial, contractual, or similar dealings with NAM.  In order for Dr. Fauci to accept the cash prize, we reviewed the exception to the gift rules for meritorious public service orachievement at section 2635.204(d) (emphasis added): (1) An employee may accept a bona fide award for meritorious public service or achievement and any itemincident to the award, provided that:Released by Chairman Rand Paul
 (i) The award and any item incident to the award are not from a person who has interests that may besubstantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of the employee's official duties, or froman association or other organization if a majority of its members have such interests; The definition of “person” is found at section 2635.102(k) and is:  (k) Person means an individual, corporation and subsidiaries it controls, company, association, firm, partnership,society, joint stock company, or any other organization or institution, including any officer, employee, or agent ofsuch person or entity. For purposes of this part, a corporation will be deemed to control a subsidiary if it owns 50percent or more of the subsidiary's voting securities. The term is all-inclusive and applies to commercial venturesand nonprofit organizations as well as to foreign, State, and local governments, including the Government of theDistrict of Columbia. It does not include any agency or other entity of the Federal Government or any officer oremployee thereof when acting in his official capacity on behalf of that agency or entity. The “National Academy of Sciences (in this chapter, the “corporation”) is a federally chartered corporation.”  36 USC §150301.  Pursuant to its Mission statement, NAS “is a private, non-profit society [and is] charged with providingindependent, objective advice to the nation on matters related to science and technology.”  The Act to Incorporate theNational Academy of Sciences (aka the Academy Charter) states “the Academy shall, whenever called upon by anydepartment of the Government, investigate, examine, experiment, and report upon any subject of science or art . . . .” Academy Charter at §3. While a corporation is a “person” under section 2635.102(k), I argue that the type of corporationthat NAS is – a federally chartered corporation, with its exceptional mission to advise the Federal Government – is not thetype of corporation that OGE intended to include in the definition.  First, OGE could have, but did not include in thedefinition of “person” any discussion of federally chartered corporations, perhaps because of their uniqueness.  And it’sthis uniqueness which makes the application of section 2635.204(d) unnecessary.  NIAID works with NAS because it isdirected to do so by Congress and because NAS offers NIAID an expertise that cannot be found elsewhere.  NAM did not“return the favor” to NIAID when it selected Dr. Fauci as its 2021 Lienhard awardee.  Its relationship with NIAID is rootedin legislation and will continue regardless of an unrelated award to NIAID’s Director. Last, OGE stated that “[‘person’] doesnot include any agency or other entity of the Federal Government . . . .”  I concede that NAS is not a part of the FederalGovernment.  However, in 1997, Congress amended the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) to include the NationalAcademy of Sciences under some of FACA’s provisions.  See Congressional Research Service report, CongressionallyChartered Nonprofit Organizations ("Title 36 Corporations"): What They Are and How Congress Treats Them (July 14,2008).  There, CSR noted that the FACA amendment was: [T]he first instance in which Congress has made [federally chartered corporations] subject to the provisions of ageneral management law, and while the action may be supportable on public policy grounds, it does, to theextent of the applicable provisions, diminish the private character of the affected organizations.  As such, itconstitutes a precedent with implications. CSR Report at 7.  FACA’s partial application to NAS further supports viewing NAS as a different kind of corporate entity thatis outside of the regulatory definition of “person.”  Therefore, if NAS is not a “person,” NAS’ non-person status extends toNAM, an entity established under NAS’ charter.  Consequently, the pending NIAID-NAS matters do not make a gift fromNAM a prohibited gift for Dr. Fauci under the applicable regulations.   In the alternative, if you find NAS to be a “person” under 2635.102(k), then you should not find it to be the same “person”as NAM.  Even though NAM was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, the definitionof “person” supports a finding that NAM is not a subsidiary of corporate parent NAS.  The regulation explains that “forpurposes of [Part 2635], a corporation will be deemed to control a subsidiary if it owns 50 percent or more of thesubsidiary's voting securities.”  NAM does not issue voting securities, so NAS cannot control such securities; accordingly,NAM is not a subsidiary of NAS, but rather an independent entity.  Furthermore, pursuant to NAM’s Articles ofOrganization (AoO), adopted May 19, 2015 (copy attached), “the governance of [NAM] shall reside in the President andCouncil to be elected from among the membership,” AoO Art. III, § 1, “NAM shall be solely responsible for the content ofreports on projects that it undertakes, and such reports may be issued in its own name.”  AoO Art. VI, § 2.  NAM’sgoverning documents repeatedly show NAM’s independence from NAS.  Last, NAM’s AoO gives it its own authority toReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
establish awards.  AoO Art. V.  Thus, the Lienhard award and its associated cash prize are from NAM and NIAID’scommissioned studies and other projects from NAS do not make the award an impermissible gift under section2635.204(d).    Finally, if NAS and NAM are a “person,” then they are not persons who are substantially affected by the performance ornonperformance of Dr. Fauci’s duties because both “compensation” in NAS’ charter as well as “substantially” in section2635.204(d) must have meaning.  NAS’ charter states:  “[NAS] shall receive no compensation whatever for any services tothe Government of the United States.”  This is consistent with NAS’ status as a not-for-profit entity. NAS’ charter wascodified in Title 36 at Sections 150301-150304, and Section 150303 reiterates that NAS “may not receive compensationfor services to the Government, but the actual expense of the investigation, examination, experimentation, and reportshall be paid by the Government from an appropriation for that purpose.”  If the statutory language means that NAScannot receive any compensation for its investigations, examinations, experiments or reports commissioned by Federalagencies, but rather only reimbursement of expenses, then NAS is not substantially affected by NIAID’s projects. Furthermore, two of NIAID’s projects with NAS were mandated by Congress.  One project was started by another NIHInstitute which NIAID later joined.  Other collaborations were formed at the agency or department level, and not from thedirect action of NIAID.  Most importantly, every NAS project in which NIAID is involved is a large-scale project withnumerous members.  Being one of many means that NIAID’s proportional contribution does not affect NAS substantially. For all of these reasons, Dr. Fauci would not be accepting an award from a person (NAS and/or NAM) who has interestthat may be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of his official duties.  For the reasons provided above, a finding should be made that Dr. Fauci may accept the Lienhard Award and the cashprize associated with it from NAM.  If you have any questions, please contact Holli Beckerman Jaffe, cc’d above. Thank you for your consideration. With best wishes,Larry Lawrence A. Tabak, DDS, PhDPrincipal Deputy Director, NIHDeputy Ethics Counselor, NIHReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @od.nih.gov>To:"Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>Cc:"Schwetz, Tara (NIH/OD) [E]" < @nih.gov>Subject:FW: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. FauciDate:Tue, 23 Feb 2021 10:43:34 -0500Importance:NormalHad you sent Tony a copy of the request to OGE?  If not, do you think it is worth sharing it with him now?  While it wasn’tsuccessful, it was a big and difficult effort.  Perhaps he’ll appreciate it.  I suggested language with and without forwardingyour email to Randy. Tony, I write to inform you of the final decision regarding the cash prize associated with NAM’s Lienhard Award.  Unfortunately,we were not successful in our appeal.  While you can accept the honor of being named the 2020 Lienhard awardee, youmay not receive the cash.  1)  For you information, below is the lengthy and detailed argument . . .  or 2) We presented alengthy and detailed argument first to HHS’s Office of the General Counsel (OGC) and then to the independent US Officeof Government Ethics (OGE) to persuade them that NAM’s relationship with Government agencies is unique, and thus, anaward from NAM should be viewed differently than one bestowed by other non-profit corporations.  However, neitherOGC nor OGE felt it was necessary to change their previous determination regarding NAM so that you would be permittedto accept the cash prize under the applicable regulations.  I’m disappointed that we did not get a different decision.  You are deserving of the additional recognition. LAT From: Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC) <@hhs.gov>Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2021 4:47 PMTo: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Cc: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Subject: RE: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Dr. Tabak: Good afternoon.  This is to let you know that OGE has responded to our request to consider whether the gift ruleexception for awards applies in the case of the Lienhard Award the NAM presented to Dr. Fauci.  Unfortunately, OGE hasconcluded that the NASEM/NAM is/are a “person” under the government-wide rules restricting gifts from outside sourcesand that they are a person that can be “substantially affected by the performance or non-performance” of Dr. Fauci’sduties.  As a result, we are unable to change our prior determination that he cannot accept the $40,000 cash giftassociated with the Lienhard Award. Please let us know if you have any questions. Randy Randall J. HallActing Associate General Counsel for EthicsAlternate Designated Agency Ethics OfficialEthics DivisionDepartment of Health and Human Services Released by Chairman Rand Paul
NOTICE:  THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), ETHICS DIVISION IS INTENDED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S)NAMES ABOVE AND MAY CONTAIN PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT SHOULD NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO UNAUTHORIZED ADDRESSEES. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR,PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.  EMPLOYEE RECIPIENTS ARE COUNSELED THAT DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR VIOLATING FEDERALETHICS REGULATIONS MAY NOT BE TAKEN AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE WHO HAS ENGAGED IN CONDUCT IN GOOD FAITH RELIANCE UPON THE PRIOR ADVICE OF ANYAGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL, PROVIDED THAT THE EMPLOYEE HAS MADE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES.  IF EMPLOYEE CONDUCT IS POTENTIALLYSUBJECT TO CRIMINAL SANCTIONS UNDER CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND RELATED STATUTES, RELIANCE OF THE ADVICE OF AN AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL ININTERPRETING THE SCOPE OF SUCH STATUTES IS A FACTOR THAT MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN EXERCISING PROSECUTORIALDISCRETION.  EMPLOYEES ARE CAUTIONED THAT DISCLOSURES TO AN OGC ATTORNEY ARE NOT PROTTECTED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT BY ATTORNEY-CLIENTPRIVILEGE.  ALL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING AGENCY ATTORNEYS, ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS TO THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. From: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E]Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 10:46 AMTo: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Cc: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@OD.NIH.GOV>; Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC) (@hhs.gov)<@hhs.gov>Subject: RE: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Dr. Tabak: Good morning.  As a quick update on the status of this item, Randy and I talked and we have forwarded your note to OGEwith a request that they consider the questions presented.  We will keep you apprised of what we hear.  That said, wehave no idea when to expect a response given that OGE is heavily involved in working to bring the Biden team memberson board across the entire Executive Branch.  We will, however, be checking in. I am not turning to focus on the Dan David Prize. Best, Gretchen Gretchen H. Weaver, J.D.Supervisory/Senior NIH Ethics CounselDHHS/OGC/Ethics Divisionphone: fax:  NOTICE:  THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), ETHICS DIVISION IS INTENDED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S)NAMES ABOVE AND MAY CONTAIN PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT SHOULD NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO UNAUTHORIZED ADDRESSEES. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR,PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.  EMPLOYEE RECIPIENTS ARE COUNSELED THAT DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR VIOLATING FEDERALETHICS REGULATIONS MAY NOT BE TAKEN AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE WHO HAS ENGAGED IN CONDUCT IN GOOD FAITH RELIANCE UPON THE PRIOR ADVICE OF ANYAGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL, PROVIDED THAT THE EMPLOYEE HAS MADE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES.  IF EMPLOYEE CONDUCT IS POTENTIALLYSUBJECT TO CRIMINAL SANCTIONS UNDER CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND RELATED STATUTES, RELIANCE OF THE ADVICE OF AN AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL ININTERPRETING THE SCOPE OF SUCH STATUTES IS A FACTOR THAT MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN EXERCISING PROSECUTORIALDISCRETION.  EMPLOYEES ARE CAUTIONED THAT DISCLOSURES TO AN OGC ATTORNEY ARE NOT PROTTECTED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT BY ATTORNEY-CLIENTPRIVILEGE.  ALL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING AGENCY ATTORNEYS, ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS TO THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. From: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 5:51 AMTo: Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC) <@HHS.GOV>Cc: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>; Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Subject: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Mr. Hall, I write to request your concurrence that the exception to the gift prohibition at section 2635.204(d) does not prohibit Dr.Anthony Fauci from accepting the cash prize associated with the National Academy of Medicine’s (NAM) 2020 Gustav O.Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Lienhard Award.  Specifically, I ask you to find that: 1) the National Academies of Sciences (NAS), the umbrellaorganization under which NAM was established, is not a “person” under the regulations, and similarly, neither is NAM; or2) if NAS is a “person,” NAM and NAS are different “persons” because of NAM’s independence from NAS; and/or 3) NAS isnot a “person who can be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of [Dr. Fauci’s NIH] duties.”  If youdo not concur, I ask that you forward this discussion to the Office of Government Ethics for their consideration anddetermination of the applicability of the gift rule to the NAM Lienhard Award. As you likely know, Dr. Fauci is the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).  He wasawarded the Lienhard award from NAM on October 19, 2020.  The Lienhard award – a medal and $40,000 – recognizesindividuals for outstanding achievement in improving health care services in the United States.  NIAID currently funds twoCongressionally-mandated studies as well as six other projects including an Action Collaborative, a Board, two Forums anda Roundtable.  NIAID contributes to the latter projects typically as one of several NIH Institutes and Centers.  It is ourunderstanding that due to a restructuring of NAS, all the business interactions between the Academies and Federalagencies go through NAS.  Thus, NIAID has no current financial, contractual, or similar dealings with NAM.  In order for Dr. Fauci to accept the cash prize, we reviewed the exception to the gift rules for meritorious public service orachievement at section 2635.204(d) (emphasis added): (1) An employee may accept a bona fide award for meritorious public service or achievement and any itemincident to the award, provided that: (i) The award and any item incident to the award are not from a person who has interests that may besubstantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of the employee's official duties, or froman association or other organization if a majority of its members have such interests; The definition of “person” is found at section 2635.102(k) and is:  (k) Person means an individual, corporation and subsidiaries it controls, company, association, firm, partnership,society, joint stock company, or any other organization or institution, including any officer, employee, or agent ofsuch person or entity. For purposes of this part, a corporation will be deemed to control a subsidiary if it owns 50percent or more of the subsidiary's voting securities. The term is all-inclusive and applies to commercial venturesand nonprofit organizations as well as to foreign, State, and local governments, including the Government of theDistrict of Columbia. It does not include any agency or other entity of the Federal Government or any officer oremployee thereof when acting in his official capacity on behalf of that agency or entity. The “National Academy of Sciences (in this chapter, the “corporation”) is a federally chartered corporation.”  36 USC §150301.  Pursuant to its Mission statement, NAS “is a private, non-profit society [and is] charged with providingindependent, objective advice to the nation on matters related to science and technology.”  The Act to Incorporate theNational Academy of Sciences (aka the Academy Charter) states “the Academy shall, whenever called upon by anydepartment of the Government, investigate, examine, experiment, and report upon any subject of science or art . . . .” Academy Charter at §3. While a corporation is a “person” under section 2635.102(k), I argue that the type of corporationthat NAS is – a federally chartered corporation, with its exceptional mission to advise the Federal Government – is not thetype of corporation that OGE intended to include in the definition.  First, OGE could have, but did not include in thedefinition of “person” any discussion of federally chartered corporations, perhaps because of their uniqueness.  And it’sthis uniqueness which makes the application of section 2635.204(d) unnecessary.  NIAID works with NAS because it isdirected to do so by Congress and because NAS offers NIAID an expertise that cannot be found elsewhere.  NAM did not“return the favor” to NIAID when it selected Dr. Fauci as its 2021 Lienhard awardee.  Its relationship with NIAID is rootedin legislation and will continue regardless of an unrelated award to NIAID’s Director. Last, OGE stated that “[‘person’] doesnot include any agency or other entity of the Federal Government . . . .”  I concede that NAS is not a part of the FederalGovernment.  However, in 1997, Congress amended the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) to include the NationalAcademy of Sciences under some of FACA’s provisions.  See Congressional Research Service report, CongressionallyChartered Nonprofit Organizations ("Title 36 Corporations"): What They Are and How Congress Treats Them (July 14,2008).  There, CSR noted that the FACA amendment was: Released by Chairman Rand Paul
[T]he first instance in which Congress has made [federally chartered corporations] subject to the provisions of ageneral management law, and while the action may be supportable on public policy grounds, it does, to theextent of the applicable provisions, diminish the private character of the affected organizations.  As such, itconstitutes a precedent with implications. CSR Report at 7.  FACA’s partial application to NAS further supports viewing NAS as a different kind of corporate entity thatis outside of the regulatory definition of “person.”  Therefore, if NAS is not a “person,” NAS’ non-person status extends toNAM, an entity established under NAS’ charter.  Consequently, the pending NIAID-NAS matters do not make a gift fromNAM a prohibited gift for Dr. Fauci under the applicable regulations.   In the alternative, if you find NAS to be a “person” under 2635.102(k), then you should not find it to be the same “person”as NAM.  Even though NAM was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, the definitionof “person” supports a finding that NAM is not a subsidiary of corporate parent NAS.  The regulation explains that “forpurposes of [Part 2635], a corporation will be deemed to control a subsidiary if it owns 50 percent or more of thesubsidiary's voting securities.”  NAM does not issue voting securities, so NAS cannot control such securities; accordingly,NAM is not a subsidiary of NAS, but rather an independent entity.  Furthermore, pursuant to NAM’s Articles ofOrganization (AoO), adopted May 19, 2015 (copy attached), “the governance of [NAM] shall reside in the President andCouncil to be elected from among the membership,” AoO Art. III, § 1, “NAM shall be solely responsible for the content ofreports on projects that it undertakes, and such reports may be issued in its own name.”  AoO Art. VI, § 2.  NAM’sgoverning documents repeatedly show NAM’s independence from NAS.  Last, NAM’s AoO gives it its own authority toestablish awards.  AoO Art. V.  Thus, the Lienhard award and its associated cash prize are from NAM and NIAID’scommissioned studies and other projects from NAS do not make the award an impermissible gift under section2635.204(d).    Finally, if NAS and NAM are a “person,” then they are not persons who are substantially affected by the performance ornonperformance of Dr. Fauci’s duties because both “compensation” in NAS’ charter as well as “substantially” in section2635.204(d) must have meaning.  NAS’ charter states:  “[NAS] shall receive no compensation whatever for any services tothe Government of the United States.”  This is consistent with NAS’ status as a not-for-profit entity. NAS’ charter wascodified in Title 36 at Sections 150301-150304, and Section 150303 reiterates that NAS “may not receive compensationfor services to the Government, but the actual expense of the investigation, examination, experimentation, and reportshall be paid by the Government from an appropriation for that purpose.”  If the statutory language means that NAScannot receive any compensation for its investigations, examinations, experiments or reports commissioned by Federalagencies, but rather only reimbursement of expenses, then NAS is not substantially affected by NIAID’s projects. Furthermore, two of NIAID’s projects with NAS were mandated by Congress.  One project was started by another NIHInstitute which NIAID later joined.  Other collaborations were formed at the agency or department level, and not from thedirect action of NIAID.  Most importantly, every NAS project in which NIAID is involved is a large-scale project withnumerous members.  Being one of many means that NIAID’s proportional contribution does not affect NAS substantially. For all of these reasons, Dr. Fauci would not be accepting an award from a person (NAS and/or NAM) who has interestthat may be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of his official duties.  For the reasons provided above, a finding should be made that Dr. Fauci may accept the Lienhard Award and the cashprize associated with it from NAM.  If you have any questions, please contact Holli Beckerman Jaffe, cc’d above. Thank you for your consideration. With best wishes,Larry Lawrence A. Tabak, DDS, PhDPrincipal Deputy Director, NIHDeputy Ethics Counselor, NIHReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" < @nih.gov>To:"Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @od.nih.gov>Subject:Re: Dan David Prize winners include Fauci and RosenbergDate:Tue, 16 Feb 2021 08:58:30 -0500Importance:NormalOk - thanks From: "Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @od.nih.gov>Date: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 at 8:36 AMTo: "Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>Subject: RE: Dan David Prize winners include Fauci and Rosenberg The first I heard about Steve’s selection was when I checked the website last evening for Tony’s announcement.  I wroteNCI Ethics and they knew about it from Steve but had not yet filed an award form.  They will do so shortly. From: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 7:33 AMTo: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] < @od.nih.gov>Subject: FW: Dan David Prize winners include Fauci and Rosenberg So did we know about Rosenberg’s award? From: "Gottesman, Michael (NIH/OD) [E]" <@mail.nih.gov>Date: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 at 7:23 AMTo: Francis Collins <@od.nih.gov>, NIH Director's Executive Committee <@mail.nih.gov>Subject: Re: Dan David Prize winners include Fauci and Rosenberg Wow!  A twofer. Michael  From: "Collins, Francis (NIH/OD) [E]" <@od.nih.gov>Date: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 at 6:12:50 AMTo: "NIH Director's Executive Committee" <@mail.nih.gov>Subject: Dan David Prize winners include Fauci and Rosenberg https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-donald-trump-science-pandemics-israel-25c3a68083ce77652a4330e944cced73Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" < @nih.gov>To:Francis Collins < @od.nih.gov>Bcc:"Schwetz, Tara (NIH/OD) [E]" < @nih.gov>Subject:FW: Decision on Gustav O. Lienhard AwardDate:Tue, 23 Feb 2021 22:08:07 -0500Importance:NormalFyi; I don’t think Tony will raise the issue, but just in case. We went all out, and failed…Larry From: Anthony Fauci < @niaid.nih.gov>Date: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 10:06 PMTo: "Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>Cc: "Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @od.nih.gov>Subject: RE: Decision on Gustav O. Lienhard Award Larry:   Many thanks to you and Holli for trying so hard on my behalf.   It is much appreciated.Best regards,Tony From: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 1:54 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Cc: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] < @od.nih.gov>Subject: Decision on Gustav O. Lienhard Award Tony, With much credit to Holli, we presented a detailed argument first to HHS’s Office of the General Counsel (OGC) (pastedbelow, reading bottom up) and then to the independent US Office of Government Ethics (OGE) to try to persuade themthat NAM’s relationship with Government agencies is unique, and thus, an award from NAM should be viewed differentlythan one bestowed by other non-profit corporations. Unfortunately, neither OGC nor OGE was convinced to change theirprevious determination regarding NAM so that you would be permitted to accept the cash prize under the applicableregulations.  I am very disappointed that we did not get a different decision. You are most deserving of the additional recognition. Larry From: Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC) <@hhs.gov>Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2021 4:47 PMTo: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Cc: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Subject: RE: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Dr. Tabak: Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Good afternoon.  This is to let you know that OGE has responded to our request to consider whether the gift ruleexception for awards applies in the case of the Lienhard Award the NAM presented to Dr. Fauci.  Unfortunately, OGE hasconcluded that the NASEM/NAM is/are a “person” under the government-wide rules restricting gifts from outside sourcesand that they are a person that can be “substantially affected by the performance or non-performance” of Dr. Fauci’sduties.  As a result, we are unable to change our prior determination that he cannot accept the $40,000 cash giftassociated with the Lienhard Award. Please let us know if you have any questions. Randy Randall J. HallActing Associate General Counsel for EthicsAlternate Designated Agency Ethics OfficialEthics DivisionDepartment of Health and Human Services NOTICE:  THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), ETHICS DIVISION IS INTENDED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S)NAMES ABOVE AND MAY CONTAIN PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT SHOULD NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO UNAUTHORIZED ADDRESSEES. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR,PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.  EMPLOYEE RECIPIENTS ARE COUNSELED THAT DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR VIOLATING FEDERALETHICS REGULATIONS MAY NOT BE TAKEN AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE WHO HAS ENGAGED IN CONDUCT IN GOOD FAITH RELIANCE UPON THE PRIOR ADVICE OF ANYAGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL, PROVIDED THAT THE EMPLOYEE HAS MADE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES.  IF EMPLOYEE CONDUCT IS POTENTIALLYSUBJECT TO CRIMINAL SANCTIONS UNDER CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND RELATED STATUTES, RELIANCE OF THE ADVICE OF AN AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL ININTERPRETING THE SCOPE OF SUCH STATUTES IS A FACTOR THAT MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN EXERCISING PROSECUTORIALDISCRETION.  EMPLOYEES ARE CAUTIONED THAT DISCLOSURES TO AN OGC ATTORNEY ARE NOT PROTTECTED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT BY ATTORNEY-CLIENTPRIVILEGE.  ALL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING AGENCY ATTORNEYS, ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS TO THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. From: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E]Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 10:46 AMTo: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Cc: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@OD.NIH.GOV>; Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC) (@hhs.gov)<@hhs.gov>Subject: RE: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Dr. Tabak: Good morning.  As a quick update on the status of this item, Randy and I talked and we have forwarded your note to OGEwith a request that they consider the questions presented.  We will keep you apprised of what we hear.  That said, wehave no idea when to expect a response given that OGE is heavily involved in working to bring the Biden team memberson board across the entire Executive Branch.  We will, however, be checking in. I am not turning to focus on the Dan David Prize. Best, Gretchen Gretchen H. Weaver, J.D.Supervisory/Senior NIH Ethics CounselDHHS/OGC/Ethics Divisionphone: fax:  NOTICE:  THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), ETHICS DIVISION IS INTENDED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S)NAMES ABOVE AND MAY CONTAIN PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT SHOULD NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO UNAUTHORIZED ADDRESSEES. Released by Chairman Rand Paul
IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR,PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.  EMPLOYEE RECIPIENTS ARE COUNSELED THAT DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR VIOLATING FEDERALETHICS REGULATIONS MAY NOT BE TAKEN AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE WHO HAS ENGAGED IN CONDUCT IN GOOD FAITH RELIANCE UPON THE PRIOR ADVICE OF ANYAGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL, PROVIDED THAT THE EMPLOYEE HAS MADE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES.  IF EMPLOYEE CONDUCT IS POTENTIALLYSUBJECT TO CRIMINAL SANCTIONS UNDER CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND RELATED STATUTES, RELIANCE OF THE ADVICE OF AN AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL ININTERPRETING THE SCOPE OF SUCH STATUTES IS A FACTOR THAT MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN EXERCISING PROSECUTORIALDISCRETION.  EMPLOYEES ARE CAUTIONED THAT DISCLOSURES TO AN OGC ATTORNEY ARE NOT PROTTECTED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT BY ATTORNEY-CLIENTPRIVILEGE.  ALL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING AGENCY ATTORNEYS, ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS TO THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL. From: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 5:51 AMTo: Hall, Randall (HHS/OGC) <@HHS.GOV>Cc: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E] @od.nih.gov>; Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Subject: Request for concurrence -Gustav O. Lienhard Award -A. Fauci Mr. Hall, I write to request your concurrence that the exception to the gift prohibition at section 2635.204(d) does not prohibit Dr.Anthony Fauci from accepting the cash prize associated with the National Academy of Medicine’s (NAM) 2020 Gustav O.Lienhard Award.  Specifically, I ask you to find that: 1) the National Academies of Sciences (NAS), the umbrellaorganization under which NAM was established, is not a “person” under the regulations, and similarly, neither is NAM; or2) if NAS is a “person,” NAM and NAS are different “persons” because of NAM’s independence from NAS; and/or 3) NAS isnot a “person who can be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of [Dr. Fauci’s NIH] duties.”  If youdo not concur, I ask that you forward this discussion to the Office of Government Ethics for their consideration anddetermination of the applicability of the gift rule to the NAM Lienhard Award. As you likely know, Dr. Fauci is the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).  He wasawarded the Lienhard award from NAM on October 19, 2020.  The Lienhard award – a medal and $40,000 – recognizesindividuals for outstanding achievement in improving health care services in the United States.  NIAID currently funds twoCongressionally-mandated studies as well as six other projects including an Action Collaborative, a Board, two Forums anda Roundtable.  NIAID contributes to the latter projects typically as one of several NIH Institutes and Centers.  It is ourunderstanding that due to a restructuring of NAS, all the business interactions between the Academies and Federalagencies go through NAS.  Thus, NIAID has no current financial, contractual, or similar dealings with NAM.  In order for Dr. Fauci to accept the cash prize, we reviewed the exception to the gift rules for meritorious public service orachievement at section 2635.204(d) (emphasis added): (1) An employee may accept a bona fide award for meritorious public service or achievement and any itemincident to the award, provided that: (i) The award and any item incident to the award are not from a person who has interests that may besubstantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of the employee's official duties, or froman association or other organization if a majority of its members have such interests; The definition of “person” is found at section 2635.102(k) and is:  (k) Person means an individual, corporation and subsidiaries it controls, company, association, firm, partnership,society, joint stock company, or any other organization or institution, including any officer, employee, or agent ofsuch person or entity. For purposes of this part, a corporation will be deemed to control a subsidiary if it owns 50percent or more of the subsidiary's voting securities. The term is all-inclusive and applies to commercial venturesand nonprofit organizations as well as to foreign, State, and local governments, including the Government of theDistrict of Columbia. It does not include any agency or other entity of the Federal Government or any officer oremployee thereof when acting in his official capacity on behalf of that agency or entity. The “National Academy of Sciences (in this chapter, the “corporation”) is a federally chartered corporation.”  36 USC §150301.  Pursuant to its Mission statement, NAS “is a private, non-profit society [and is] charged with providingReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
independent, objective advice to the nation on matters related to science and technology.”  The Act to Incorporate theNational Academy of Sciences (aka the Academy Charter) states “the Academy shall, whenever called upon by anydepartment of the Government, investigate, examine, experiment, and report upon any subject of science or art . . . .” Academy Charter at §3. While a corporation is a “person” under section 2635.102(k), I argue that the type of corporationthat NAS is – a federally chartered corporation, with its exceptional mission to advise the Federal Government – is not thetype of corporation that OGE intended to include in the definition.  First, OGE could have, but did not include in thedefinition of “person” any discussion of federally chartered corporations, perhaps because of their uniqueness.  And it’sthis uniqueness which makes the application of section 2635.204(d) unnecessary.  NIAID works with NAS because it isdirected to do so by Congress and because NAS offers NIAID an expertise that cannot be found elsewhere.  NAM did not“return the favor” to NIAID when it selected Dr. Fauci as its 2021 Lienhard awardee.  Its relationship with NIAID is rootedin legislation and will continue regardless of an unrelated award to NIAID’s Director. Last, OGE stated that “[‘person’] doesnot include any agency or other entity of the Federal Government . . . .”  I concede that NAS is not a part of the FederalGovernment.  However, in 1997, Congress amended the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) to include the NationalAcademy of Sciences under some of FACA’s provisions.  See Congressional Research Service report, CongressionallyChartered Nonprofit Organizations ("Title 36 Corporations"): What They Are and How Congress Treats Them (July 14,2008).  There, CSR noted that the FACA amendment was: [T]he first instance in which Congress has made [federally chartered corporations] subject to the provisions of ageneral management law, and while the action may be supportable on public policy grounds, it does, to theextent of the applicable provisions, diminish the private character of the affected organizations.  As such, itconstitutes a precedent with implications. CSR Report at 7.  FACA’s partial application to NAS further supports viewing NAS as a different kind of corporate entity thatis outside of the regulatory definition of “person.”  Therefore, if NAS is not a “person,” NAS’ non-person status extends toNAM, an entity established under NAS’ charter.  Consequently, the pending NIAID-NAS matters do not make a gift fromNAM a prohibited gift for Dr. Fauci under the applicable regulations.   In the alternative, if you find NAS to be a “person” under 2635.102(k), then you should not find it to be the same “person”as NAM.  Even though NAM was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, the definitionof “person” supports a finding that NAM is not a subsidiary of corporate parent NAS.  The regulation explains that “forpurposes of [Part 2635], a corporation will be deemed to control a subsidiary if it owns 50 percent or more of thesubsidiary's voting securities.”  NAM does not issue voting securities, so NAS cannot control such securities; accordingly,NAM is not a subsidiary of NAS, but rather an independent entity.  Furthermore, pursuant to NAM’s Articles ofOrganization (AoO), adopted May 19, 2015 (copy attached), “the governance of [NAM] shall reside in the President andCouncil to be elected from among the membership,” AoO Art. III, § 1, “NAM shall be solely responsible for the content ofreports on projects that it undertakes, and such reports may be issued in its own name.”  AoO Art. VI, § 2.  NAM’sgoverning documents repeatedly show NAM’s independence from NAS.  Last, NAM’s AoO gives it its own authority toestablish awards.  AoO Art. V.  Thus, the Lienhard award and its associated cash prize are from NAM and NIAID’scommissioned studies and other projects from NAS do not make the award an impermissible gift under section2635.204(d).    Finally, if NAS and NAM are a “person,” then they are not persons who are substantially affected by the performance ornonperformance of Dr. Fauci’s duties because both “compensation” in NAS’ charter as well as “substantially” in section2635.204(d) must have meaning.  NAS’ charter states:  “[NAS] shall receive no compensation whatever for any services tothe Government of the United States.”  This is consistent with NAS’ status as a not-for-profit entity. NAS’ charter wascodified in Title 36 at Sections 150301-150304, and Section 150303 reiterates that NAS “may not receive compensationfor services to the Government, but the actual expense of the investigation, examination, experimentation, and reportshall be paid by the Government from an appropriation for that purpose.”  If the statutory language means that NAScannot receive any compensation for its investigations, examinations, experiments or reports commissioned by Federalagencies, but rather only reimbursement of expenses, then NAS is not substantially affected by NIAID’s projects. Furthermore, two of NIAID’s projects with NAS were mandated by Congress.  One project was started by another NIHInstitute which NIAID later joined.  Other collaborations were formed at the agency or department level, and not from thedirect action of NIAID.  Most importantly, every NAS project in which NIAID is involved is a large-scale project withnumerous members.  Being one of many means that NIAID’s proportional contribution does not affect NAS substantially. Released by Chairman Rand Paul
For all of these reasons, Dr. Fauci would not be accepting an award from a person (NAS and/or NAM) who has interestthat may be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of his official duties.  For the reasons provided above, a finding should be made that Dr. Fauci may accept the Lienhard Award and the cashprize associated with it from NAM.  If you have any questions, please contact Holli Beckerman Jaffe, cc’d above. Thank you for your consideration. With best wishes,Larry Lawrence A. Tabak, DDS, PhDPrincipal Deputy Director, NIHDeputy Ethics Counselor, NIHReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>To:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject:FW: Dan David Prize - Information Letter PASSPORT COPYDate:Mon, 19 Apr 2021 11:27:23 -0400Importance:NormalAttachments:InformationLetter2021Fauci.docx; InformationLetter2021Fauci(1).docx; Fauci_passport.pdf  From: Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E]Sent: Monday, March 1, 2021 9:48 AMTo: Dan David Prize < @tauex.tau.ac.il>; Charlotte Halle < @tauex.tau.ac.il>Cc: Greg Folkers ( @niaid.nih.gov) < @niaid.nih.gov>; Billet, Courtney (NIH/NIAID) [E]< @niaid.nih.gov>; Awwad, David (NIH/NIAID) [C] < @niaid.nih.gov>; Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]< @niaid.nih.gov>; Kimberly (NIH/NIAID) Barasch [C] (@nih.gov) <@nih.gov>Subject: FW: Dan David Prize - Information Letter Good afternoon: Dr. Fauci asked that I respond to your letter on his behalf.  I will be the overall point of contactfor Dr. Fauci’s participation in your event – I very  much look forward to working with your teamon this exciting honor. Below are the responses to your questions: 1. We are holding May 9, 2021 for the event.  Please send us a run of show/timeline at yourearliest convenience.  If Dr. Fauci will be expected to make any remarks, please do let usknow how long his remarks should be and any details related to his participation. 2. Symposia events the week of – please send any and all details as to what Dr. Fauci’s rolewill be so that we can begin to make the appropriate preparations. 3. Monetary Award:  Attached is a copy of Dr. Fauci’s government passport as well as theinformation below in case it is hard to read:Passport Number:Passport Issue Date:08/08/2019Passport Expiration Date:08/07/2024 4. PR/Press related inquiries: Courtney Billet is our Communications Director -please feel freeto contact her regarding any media/social media questions or concerns. Again, thank you and please let us know if you have any additional questions for us. Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Mascola, John (NIH/VRC) [E]" < @mail.nih.gov>To:"Erbelding, Emily (NIH/NIAID) [E]" <@nih.gov>, "Embry, Alan(NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject:FW: -Date:Mon, 01 Mar 2021 21:38:21 -0500Importance:NormalAttachments:ME_DW_FDA_3_1_21_.pdfFYSA I will review with Barney, Karin and Julie at VRC to get some input of what this may mean. From: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Sent: Monday, March 1, 2021 6:07 PMTo: Mascola, John (NIH/VRC) [E] < @mail.nih.gov>Cc: Lane, Cliff (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject: FW: - Let us discuss. Anthony S. Fauci, MDDirectorNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of HealthBethesda, MD Phone: FAX: E-mail: @niaid.nih.govThe information in this e-mail and any of its attachments is confidential and may contain sensitive information.  Itshould not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient.  If you have received this e-mail in errorplease inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage devices.  The National Institute ofAllergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) shall not accept liability for any statements made that are the sender'sown and not expressly made on behalf of the NIAID by one of its representatives.  From: Weissman, Drew <@pennmedicine.upenn.edu>Sent: Monday, March 1, 2021 5:21 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Re: - Tony, Here is the human dose IM studies in pregnant mice. We still have some concern over the data and are talking to all of theappropriate people. Congratulations on the Dan David Prize Hope you and your family are doing well. Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Erbelding, Emily (NIH/NIAID) [E]" <@nih.gov>To:"Bok, Karin (NIH/VRC) [E]" < @nih.gov>Subject:RE: -Date:Tue, 02 Mar 2021 09:32:38 -0500Importance:NormalThanks Karin.I don’t know what Drew Weismann is trying to accomplish with this.Ultimately this is an FDA decision. From: Bok, Karin (NIH/VRC) [E] < @nih.gov>Sent: Tuesday, March 2, 2021 8:51 AMTo: Erbelding, Emily (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@nih.gov>Subject: FW: - I am sure you are also dealing with this, my answer to John below if helpful. Karin John, Thank you for sharing. I have no comments or concerns about this study, this is typically what you would see in mice withother types of vaccines as well, and it makes sense that mRNA is present in other sites as well, including placenta, etc.As a side note, I was part of the deliberation with CDC (ACIP/ACOG) that led to the permissive recommendation inpregnancy, and the assumptions from the authors below are very incorrect: Assumption that all of mRNA-LNP degraded at injection site Balancing perhaps differential risk/benefit ratio for maternal health vs fetal health  The SMEs on that call (especially obgyns) were aware that mRNA might reach the fetus. The only discussion was aroundthe possibility of that mRNA to integrate into the nuclear DNA. And the second main concern was the fever caused by thevaccine, especially during the first trimester, but they went around that by recommending the administration ofacetaminophen after vaccination. Needless to say both mom and baby’s health are important. CDC recently provided a nice overview of the over 30,000 pregnant women who have been vaccinated so far, with morethan 200 deliveries with no safety concerns. All vaccines administered to pregnant women historically have been foundsafe for mother and baby, so when we recently discussed pregnancy and the J&J vaccine, there was no concern, theyrecommended its use also unanimously. Let me know if you would like us (Emily, myself) to get a second opinion from the obgyns in the special populationsworking group (mainly Rich Beigi and Flor Muñoz) Thanks!Karin.  Karin Bok, MS, PhDSenior Advisor, Vaccine DevelopmentOffice of the Director, Vaccine Research CenterNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of HealthReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
phone: | mobile: | email: @nih.govhttps://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/vrc   From: "Mascola, John (NIH/VRC) [E]" <@mail.nih.gov>Date: Monday, March 1, 2021 at 9:37 PMTo: "Koup, Richard (NIH/VRC) [E]" <@mail.nih.gov>, "Graham, Barney (NIH/VRC) [E]"<@mail.nih.gov>, "Ledgerwood, Julie (NIH/NIAID) [E]" <@nih.gov>, Karin Bok@nih.gov>Cc: "Sitar, Sandra (NIH/VRC) [C]" <@mail.nih.gov>Subject: FW: - FYI.  We should each review and then discuss.  Thanks,John  From: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Sent: Monday, March 1, 2021 6:07 PMTo: Mascola, John (NIH/VRC) [E] <@mail.nih.gov>Cc: Lane, Cliff (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: FW: - Let us discuss. Anthony S. Fauci, MDDirectorNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of HealthBethesda, MD Phone: FAX: E-mail:@niaid.nih.govThe information in this e-mail and any of its attachments is confidential and may contain sensitive information.  Itshould not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient.  If you have received this e-mail in errorplease inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage devices.  The National Institute ofAllergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) shall not accept liability for any statements made that are the sender'sown and not expressly made on behalf of the NIAID by one of its representatives.  From: Weissman, Drew <@pennmedicine.upenn.edu>Sent: Monday, March 1, 2021 5:21 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Re: - Tony, Here is the human dose IM studies in pregnant mice. We still have some concern over the data and are talking to all of theappropriate people.Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Philadelphia, PA  Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @od.nih.gov>To:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>Cc:"Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>Subject:Dan David PrizeDate:Thu, 04 Mar 2021 17:05:02 -0500Importance:NormalHi Tony, I write regarding an invitation to suggest candidates the referenced Prize.  As I’m sure you know, Steve Rosenberg, NCI,was also selected as a Dan David Prize winner.  Below is an excerpt from an email Steve received from Dan David invitinghim to suggest candidates for its scholarship program.  I assume you received a similar invitation.  I discussed this withGretchen Weaver in OGC, and it was determined that making such recommendations is impermissible under ourregulations.  Since this is an optional activity, I expect this won’t cause any problems.  Please let me know if you have anyquestions. Doctoral / Postdoctoral ScholarshipsPlease note that you are welcome to suggest doctoral and postdoctoral researchers for the Dan David Prizescholarship. The candidate should submit an application through our website www.dandavidprize.org, adhering toall the relevant requirements. An ad-hoc committee headed by the Vice Rector of Tel Aviv University and membersfrom the relevant departments will review the applications. Students recommended by the laureates will have highpriority. Please note that the deadline for submitting an application is March 10, 2021. Holli Holli Beckerman JaffeDirector, NIH Ethics OfficeBethesda, MD @od.nih.gov Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>To:"Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @OD.NIH.GOV>Cc:"Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E]" <@nih.gov>, "Conrad, Patricia(NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject:RE: Dan David PrizeDate:Thu, 04 Mar 2021 17:43:09 -0500Importance:NormalHolli:   I received a similar notice about the option of suggesting candidates for the scholarship program.   I will tellthem that they should choose whom they wish without any suggestions from me.Thanks,Tony From: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] < @od.nih.gov>Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 5:05 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Cc: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Subject: Dan David Prize Hi Tony, I write regarding an invitation to suggest candidates the referenced Prize.  As I’m sure you know, Steve Rosenberg, NCI,was also selected as a Dan David Prize winner.  Below is an excerpt from an email Steve received from Dan David invitinghim to suggest candidates for its scholarship program.  I assume you received a similar invitation.  I discussed this withGretchen Weaver in OGC, and it was determined that making such recommendations is impermissible under ourregulations.  Since this is an optional activity, I expect this won’t cause any problems.  Please let me know if you have anyquestions. Doctoral / Postdoctoral ScholarshipsPlease note that you are welcome to suggest doctoral and postdoctoral researchers for the Dan David Prizescholarship. The candidate should submit an application through our website www.dandavidprize.org, adhering toall the relevant requirements. An ad-hoc committee headed by the Vice Rector of Tel Aviv University and membersfrom the relevant departments will review the applications. Students recommended by the laureates will have highpriority. Please note that the deadline for submitting an application is March 10, 2021. Holli Holli Beckerman JaffeDirector, NIH Ethics OfficeBethesda, MD @od.nih.gov Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>To:"Barasch, Kimberly (NIH/NIAID) [E]" <@nih.gov>Subject:FW: Dan David PrizeDate:Thu, 04 Mar 2021 17:43:36 -0500Importance:NormalPlease print this out and put into the Dan David Prize folder.   Thanks. From: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] < @od.nih.gov>Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 5:05 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Cc: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] @nih.gov>Subject: Dan David Prize Hi Tony, I write regarding an invitation to suggest candidates the referenced Prize.  As I’m sure you know, Steve Rosenberg, NCI,was also selected as a Dan David Prize winner.  Below is an excerpt from an email Steve received from Dan David invitinghim to suggest candidates for its scholarship program.  I assume you received a similar invitation.  I discussed this withGretchen Weaver in OGC, and it was determined that making such recommendations is impermissible under ourregulations.  Since this is an optional activity, I expect this won’t cause any problems.  Please let me know if you have anyquestions. Doctoral / Postdoctoral ScholarshipsPlease note that you are welcome to suggest doctoral and postdoctoral researchers for the Dan David Prizescholarship. The candidate should submit an application through our website www.dandavidprize.org, adhering toall the relevant requirements. An ad-hoc committee headed by the Vice Rector of Tel Aviv University and membersfrom the relevant departments will review the applications. Students recommended by the laureates will have highpriority. Please note that the deadline for submitting an application is March 10, 2021. Holli Holli Beckerman JaffeDirector, NIH Ethics OfficeBethesda, MD @od.nih.gov Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E]" < @od.nih.gov>To:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject:RE: Dan David PrizeDate:Thu, 04 Mar 2021 17:47:19 -0500Importance:NormalThanks Tony From: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 5:43 PMTo: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] < @od.nih.gov>Cc: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>; Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject: RE: Dan David Prize Holli:   I received a similar notice about the option of suggesting candidates for the scholarship program.   I will tellthem that they should choose whom they wish without any suggestions from me.Thanks,Tony From: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 5:05 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Cc: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Subject: Dan David Prize Hi Tony, I write regarding an invitation to suggest candidates the referenced Prize.  As I’m sure you know, Steve Rosenberg, NCI,was also selected as a Dan David Prize winner.  Below is an excerpt from an email Steve received from Dan David invitinghim to suggest candidates for its scholarship program.  I assume you received a similar invitation.  I discussed this withGretchen Weaver in OGC, and it was determined that making such recommendations is impermissible under ourregulations.  Since this is an optional activity, I expect this won’t cause any problems.  Please let me know if you have anyquestions. Doctoral / Postdoctoral ScholarshipsPlease note that you are welcome to suggest doctoral and postdoctoral researchers for the Dan David Prizescholarship. The candidate should submit an application through our website www.dandavidprize.org, adhering toall the relevant requirements. An ad-hoc committee headed by the Vice Rector of Tel Aviv University and membersfrom the relevant departments will review the applications. Students recommended by the laureates will have highpriority. Please note that the deadline for submitting an application is March 10, 2021. Holli Holli Beckerman JaffeDirector, NIH Ethics OfficeBethesda, MD @od.nih.gov Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>To:"Barasch, Kimberly (NIH/NIAID) [E]" <@nih.gov>Subject:FW: Dan David PrizeDate:Thu, 04 Mar 2021 17:49:59 -0500Importance:NormalInto folder, please From: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] < @od.nih.gov>Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 5:47 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject: RE: Dan David Prize Thanks Tony From: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 5:43 PMTo: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Cc: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>; Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: RE: Dan David Prize Holli:   I received a similar notice about the option of suggesting candidates for the scholarship program.   I will tellthem that they should choose whom they wish without any suggestions from me.Thanks,Tony From: Jaffe, Holli Beckerman (NIH/OD) [E] <@od.nih.gov>Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 5:05 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Cc: Tabak, Lawrence (NIH/OD) [E] <@nih.gov>Subject: Dan David Prize Hi Tony, I write regarding an invitation to suggest candidates the referenced Prize.  As I’m sure you know, Steve Rosenberg, NCI,was also selected as a Dan David Prize winner.  Below is an excerpt from an email Steve received from Dan David invitinghim to suggest candidates for its scholarship program.  I assume you received a similar invitation.  I discussed this withGretchen Weaver in OGC, and it was determined that making such recommendations is impermissible under ourregulations.  Since this is an optional activity, I expect this won’t cause any problems.  Please let me know if you have anyquestions. Doctoral / Postdoctoral ScholarshipsPlease note that you are welcome to suggest doctoral and postdoctoral researchers for the Dan David Prizescholarship. The candidate should submit an application through our website www.dandavidprize.org, adhering toall the relevant requirements. An ad-hoc committee headed by the Vice Rector of Tel Aviv University and membersfrom the relevant departments will review the applications. Students recommended by the laureates will have highpriority. Please note that the deadline for submitting an application is March 10, 2021. HolliReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
 Holli Beckerman JaffeDirector, NIH Ethics OfficeBethesda, MD @od.nih.gov Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>To:"Collins, Francis (NIH/OD) [E]" < @od.nih.gov>Subject:FW: -Date:Tue, 16 Mar 2021 06:14:29 -0400Importance:NormalAttachments:ME_DW_FDA_3_1_21_.pdfFrancis:   I texted you to call me last night, but it was probably too late.   Please give me a call about this at yourconvenience.Thanks,Tony From: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 9:35 PMTo: Erbelding, Emily (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@nih.gov>Subject: FW: - Here are the Weissman data. From: Weissman, Drew <@pennmedicine.upenn.edu>Sent: Monday, March 1, 2021 5:21 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Re: - Tony, Here is the human dose IM studies in pregnant mice. We still have some concern over the data and are talking to all of theappropriate people. Congratulations on the Dan David Prize Hope you and your family are doing well. Take care. Drew From: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Date: Monday, February 8, 2021 at 9:12 PMTo: Weissman, Drew <@pennmedicine.upenn.edu>Subject: [External] RE: -Drew:    Thanks for sending this.  Looks like you have touched all the bases of informing people of your results.   Itwould be interesting to see what human dose levels given IM do.   I hope that all is well with you.  Congratulations on the Rosenstiel Award!Best regards,Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
 Tami NoamProject CoordinatorDan David PrizeOffice: @tauex.tau.ac.ilEmail: www.dandavidprize.orgWebsite:     From: Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 1:55 PMTo: Charlotte Halle <@tauex.tau.ac.il>Cc: Dan David Prize <@tauex.tau.ac.il>; Barasch, Kimberly (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@nih.gov>; Awwad,David (NIH/NIAID) [C] <@niaid.nih.gov>; Folkers, Greg (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: RE: Quick request re Dan David Prize Please fed ex to the address below to the Attention of Kim Barasch as Dr. Fauci’s mail isdelayed.  I will ask Kim – cc’d here to track its arrival and make sure we send you an iphonepicture when it arrives.  Thank you.  National Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesThe National Institutes of HealthBethesda, Maryland office  From: Charlotte Halle <@tauex.tau.ac.il>Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 7:45 AMTo: Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Cc: Dan David Prize <@tauex.tau.ac.il>Subject: Quick request re Dan David Prize Dear Patti, We are preparing a framed certificate and getting ready to mail it to Dr. Fauci. (We are hoping to get a photo or film of himholding the certificate, which we would use to represent him receiving the award during our online ceremony in May.)  Please provide the postal address where it would be most convenient for him to receive this certificate.  Many thanks,Charlotte Charlotte HalléDirectorDan David PrizeOffice: Mobile: Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Email: @tauex.tau.ac.ilWebsite: www.dandavidprize.org  Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From:Charlotte Halle < @tauex.tau.ac.il>To:"Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>Cc:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>, Dan David Prize< @tauex.tau.ac.il>Subject:RE: Dan David Prize - FauciDate:Tue, 13 Apr 2021 09:03:58 -0400Importance:NormalDear Patty,The prize money will be sent via bank transfer. We will ask for the account details next week. We hope to make thetransfer the week after the award ceremony.Best wishes,Charlotte  From: Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2021 6:58 PMTo: Dan David Prize < @tauex.tau.ac.il>Cc: Charlotte Halle < @tauex.tau.ac.il>; Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Dan David Prize - Fauci Good morning: We have just received notice that Dr. Fauci is approved for payment for the Dan David Prize.  Iam adding Dr. Fauci here as well.  Please let us know what you require to transfer payment to Dr. Fauci.  Thank you in advance foryour response. Best regards, Patricia L. ConradPublic Health Analyst and  Special Assistant to the DirectorNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesThe National Institutes of HealthBethesda, Maryland  office   From: Dan David Prize <@tauex.tau.ac.il>Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 7:25 AMTo: Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>; Barasch, Kimberly (NIH/NIAID) [E]Released by Chairman Rand Paul
<@nih.gov>Cc: Charlotte Halle <@tauex.tau.ac.il>; @niaid.nih.gov' <@niaid.nih.gov>; Awwad, David(NIH/NIAID) [C] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Posting Dan David Prize Award Certificate Dear Patti and Kim, Dr. Fauci’s Dan David Prize laureate certificate has been shipped and is on its way to you. For your convenience, I am attaching the number of the DHL delivery. We would appreciate it if you let us know once youhave received it. Best wishes,Tami Tami NoamProject CoordinatorDan David PrizeOffice: @tauex.tau.ac.ilEmail: www.dandavidprize.orgWebsite:     From: Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 1:55 PMTo: Charlotte Halle <@tauex.tau.ac.il>Cc: Dan David Prize <@tauex.tau.ac.il>; Barasch, Kimberly (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@nih.gov>; Awwad,David (NIH/NIAID) [C] <@niaid.nih.gov>; Folkers, Greg (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Subject: RE: Quick request re Dan David Prize Please fed ex to the address below to the Attention of Kim Barasch as Dr. Fauci’s mail isdelayed.  I will ask Kim – cc’d here to track its arrival and make sure we send you an iphonepicture when it arrives.  Thank you.  National Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesThe National Institutes of HealthBethesda, Maryland  office  From: Charlotte Halle <@tauex.tau.ac.il>Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 7:45 AMTo: Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov>Cc: Dan David Prize <@tauex.tau.ac.il>Subject: Quick request re Dan David Prize Dear Patti,Released by Chairman Rand Paul
 We are preparing a framed certificate and getting ready to mail it to Dr. Fauci. (We are hoping to get a photo or film of himholding the certificate, which we would use to represent him receiving the award during our online ceremony in May.)  Please provide the postal address where it would be most convenient for him to receive this certificate.  Many thanks,Charlotte Charlotte HalléDirectorDan David PrizeOffice: Mobile: Email: @tauex.tau.ac.ilWebsite: www.dandavidprize.org  Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Five of the 16 people mentioned above are probably Israeli and none of them has anysignificant connection to the Israeli government.Comment by Israel A. CohenTel Aviv, Israelinactive member of the Florida Barcc: Editor, Spectator      Barbara Gastel (Texas A&M)      NIAID news room      Ariel Porat, president, TAU      Dan David Prize emailReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
I think it is fair to say that the occurrence of the Covid pandemic significantly increasedthe likelihood of Dr. Fauci becoming the sole recipient of one of the 3 Dan David Prizesawarded this year. The pandemic brought into sharp focus his contribution to this andother serious health crises during his career. The reasons for his visibility are cogentlyexplained athttps://theconversation.com/10-reasons-why-anthony-fauci-was-ready-to-be-the-face-of-the-us-pandemic-response-150596 It is not fair to say that he received the $1 million prize "as a payoff from Israel". The DanDavid Foundation is a private charitable organization similar in concept to theorganization that awards the Nobel prizes. The Dan David Prizes are almost as large butdefinitely not as well-known as the Nobelprize.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize  However, the method of determining who receives them is similar.There are 12 members on the board of the Dan David Foundation. They are listed at https://www.dandavidprize.org/about/the-boardFour seem to be US citizens, including Henry Kissinger who was the US Secretary ofState.Four seem to be Israeli, including Ariel David (son of the founder) and Ariel Porat(president of Tel Aviv University).Four seem to be French, including Emmanuel Roman who spent 18 years at GoldmanSachs.There were 4 members on the Review Committee who evaluated potential recipients ofthe prize that Dr. Fauci received. They are listed athttps://www.dandavidprize.org/about/review-committees1 - Prof Elizabeth Miller of the Faculty of Epidemiology & Population Health in London,UK.2 - Prof Philip Greenland at Northwestern University in Chicago, IL.3 - Prof. Fred Binka at the University of Health and Allied Sciences in Ghana.4 - Prof. Daniel Cohen, Head of the School of Public Health at Tel Aviv University in Israel.Five of the 16 people mentioned above are probably Israeli and none of them has anysignificant connection to the Israeli government.Comment by Israel A. CohenTel Aviv, Israelinactive member of the Florida Barcc: Editor, Spectator      Barbara Gastel (Texas A&M)      NIAID news room      Ariel Porat, president, TAU      Dan David Prize emailReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
NIH Ethics:  Summary of Analysis – Award with Cash PrizeSUMMARY OF ANALYSIS – AWARD WITH CASH PRIZE
REVIEW REQUIRED  NEAC ($2,500 or Above)  NEAC Subcommittee (Below $2,500)
NEO Specialist Receipt Date
RECIPIENT
Employee Name IC
Employee has been counselled not to cash the check or accept an electronic transfer
of funds until approval is received? Page # YES NO
Can the employee’s performance or non-performance of their official responsibilities have any effect on
the donor ( 5 CFR 5501.111 )? YES NO
Confirmation of 5 CFR 5501.111 must be included with package.  Page #
AWARD DETAILS
Award Name
Sponsor Name
TOTAL CASH VALUE ASSOCIATED WITH AWARD  $ Page #
AWARD ANALYSIS
The award has been made on a regular basis orfunded to ensure its continuation if it is a
first-time award? Page #
Under which selection of award recipient is made pursuant to written standards? Page #
Is the recipient expected to present a lecture? Page #
NEO Specialist Summary Analysis
Based on the analysis above, this award meets the regulatory requirements of a bona fide award under 5 CFR 2635.204(d)
NEO Specialist Supervisory Ethics Specialist
Director, NEO
NEAC Subcommittee Co-Chairs 4Linda Simmons 2/17/2021
Anthony Fauci NIAID445-6
2021 Dan David Prize
Dan David Foundation
900,000 3
16
The award has been given on a regular basis consistently since 2002.
11
According to the Dan David Foundation website, The Dan David Prize covers three-time dimensions - Past, Present and
Future - that represent realms of human achievement. Each year the International Board chooses one field within each
time dimension since 2002.  Nominees are evaluated by reviewing the importance of the work, its impact and its
projected influence in the relevant field. https://www.dandavidprize.org/about/about-the-prize.  It has been confirmed
that the Review Committees are indeed independent from the Tel Aviv University and chaired by international experts.
31
Expected to attend the award ceremony and  virtual symposium at which recipients are expected to give a presentation.
Presentations are talks about their work over the course of their careers, rather than current science and theory.
The award was found to comply with 2635.204(d). Also confirmed that the organization is not seeking official action from
the employee, subordinate, or agency under the employee’s official responsibility (5501.111). The gifts associated with the
award include a $900,000 cash prize which have been found to be permissible and are not prohibited under the
Emoluments Clause, nor the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act. The Dan David Foundation and the website confirm that
the 2021 Review Committee (See page 24-27) selected by the Dan David Foundation and the Foundation’s Board (See
pages 24-27) is responsible for the selection the Laureates. All of which act independently and not part of a foreign
government.Linda D.
Simmons -SDigitally signed by Linda D.
Simmons -S
Date: 2021.03.25 15:12:23
-04'00'Sherri L. Park
-SDigitally signed by Sherri L. Park -S Date: 2021.03.25 15:17:38 -04'00'Holli B. Jaffe -SDigitally signed by Holli B. Jaffe -S
Date: 2021.03.25 15:25:33 -04'00'Released by Chairman Rand Paul
 AWARD REVIEW WORKSHEET
Date Received EMIS ID #
Ethics Official IC
Employee Name
Full Name of Award
Award Sponsor
Event Date Event Location
Sponsor’s Contact
Phone Number Email
ALL GIFTS ASSOCIATED WITH AWARD:
Cash/stipend/cash equivalent $
Tangible gift (e.g., trophy, crystal bowl, sculpture) $
Other Gifts being offered:
Award Ceremony Dinner, reception, entertainment $
Can be accepted under WAG mechanism? Yes No
Travel expenses (e.g., meal, lodging, transportation, waived
registration) $
Can accept under Sponsored Travel? Yes No
List other items
Total value of other items $
Is Award on NEO’s Approved List? Yes No If Yes, date approved:
If Yes, confirm no changes to:
Cash Prize Amount Lecture Requirement Selection Process New Gifts Offered
Can the employee’s performance or non-performance of their official responsibilities have any effect on the
donor (5 CFR 5501.111)?
Yes  No Documentation of confirmation must be included with package
12/1/21Jeremy R. TamNIAIDAnthony FauciDan David PrizeExpected to attend the award ceremony and  virtual symposium at which recipients are expected to give a presentation  Presentations are talks about 5/9/2021VirtualCharlotte Halle@tauex.tau.ac.il9000001400
444444Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
 Tel Aviv  Israel. Tel:
 Email: @tauex.tau.ac.il
www.d andavidprize.org The official announcement of the 2021 Dan David Prize laureates will likely
be held on Monday, Feb. 15, 2021 at 6:00 p.m. Israel time, and will be
broadcast live on our Facebook page and website. Please note that we will
confirm the date of the announcement closer to the time.
Our office will be in contact with you shortly regarding PR activities and
materials.
On behalf of the Dan David Prize, we wish to once again extend our sincere
congratulations on your receiving this honor.

Best wishes,

Prof.  Ariel Porat   Ms. Charlotte Hallé
President, Tel Aviv University  Director
Chairperson, Dan David Prize Board  Dan David Prize
Dan David Prize

5Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From: Bennett, Arthur (NIH/NIAID) [E]
To: Simmons, Linda (NIH/OD) [E]
Cc: Tam, Jeremy (NIH/NIAID) [E]
Subject: FW: Dan David Prize documentation
Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 1:52:46 PM
Hi Linda,
Please see Dr. Fauci’s 5501.111 responses for the Dan David prize below.
Thanks,
Art
From:  Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>
Sent:  Wednesday, February 17, 2021 1:51 PM
To: Bennett, Arthur (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>
Cc: Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>
Subject:  RE: Dan David Prize documentation
Art:
   The answer to each of the 3 questions below is “false”.
Best regards,
Tony
Anthony S. Fauci, MD
Director
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases

National Institutes of Health
Bethesda, MD
Phone:
FAX:
E-mail: @niaid.nih.gov
The information in this e-mail and any of its attachments is confidential and may contain sensitive
information.  It should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient.  If you
have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any
other storage devices.  The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) shall not
accept liability for any statements made that are the sender's own and not expressly made on
behalf of the NIAID by one of its representatives.
From:  Bennett, Arthur (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov >
Sent:  Wednesday, February 17, 2021 1:33 PM
To: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov >
Subject:  Dan David Prize documentation
 5501.111
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
NOTICES
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
Awards, including cash, cash equivalents, meals, lodging,
transportation, reimbursements, entertainment, free attendance,
or other benefits incident thereto, received for the personal use,
disposition, or retention by the employee valued individually in
excess of $134 and which aggregate $335 or more must be
disclosed by employees who file a financial disclosure report.
Incumbent and termination filers of the SF-278 Public Financial
Disclosure Report include this information on Schedule B, Part II
of the form. Confidential Financial Disclosure Report (OGE-450)
filers  include these  items in Part IV. (Note that the reporting
threshold is determined every 3 years; check the financial
disclosure requirements for the current amount.)  Travel funds
accepted by the agency under the sponsored travel (HHS-348)
mechanism are gifts to the agency, rather than to the individual,
and are not reported as personal gifts on the SF-278 nor on the
OGE-450.
TAX CONSEQUENCES
Award recipients should consult their personal attorney,
accountant, or other financial advisor concerning the treatment
of awards and the benefits incident thereto for tax purposes.
Ethics officials and government attorneys do not provide tax or
other personal financial advice to government employees.    Note
that, pursuant to section 4941 and 4946 of Title 26 of the U.S.
Code, awards and other payments received from private
foundations, as defined under Section 509 of the Internal
Revenue Code, may be prohibited for Presidential appointees,
Schedule C employees, or other individuals compensated at pay
levels at or above the lowest rate of basic pay for the Senior
Executive Service under section 5382 of Title 5, United States
Code, unless the recipients of the award are selected from the
general public and consideration is not confined to government
employees.
AGENCY GIFT ACCEPTANCE
If approval is obtained in advance, tangible items intended for
display at and retention by the NIH that are accepted on behalf
of the employee’s component pursuant to an applicable agency
gift acceptance authority statute are not reportable as personal
gifts on the SF-278.  Employees should consult their employing
office, ascertain the availability of this option, and comply with
applicable procedures.  Travel reimbursement authorities
contained in Section 1353 of Title 31 of the U.S. Code, as
implemented by Part 304-1 of Title 41 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, permit the Department to accept where
appropriate, travel costs tendered by non-federal sources in
connection with the recognition of federal employees for
meritorious public service that is related to official duties.
CERTIFICATION
The signature of the employee on this form certifies that the
statements made and information provided on this form are true,
complete, and correct to the best of the individual’s knowledge. PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Section 7301 of Title 5 of the U.S. Code and Executive Order
12674, as implemented by Sections 2635.204(d) and 5501.111
of Title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations, authorize the
collection of this information.  Disclosure of this information is
mandatory for employees seeking authorization from an agency
ethics official to accept awards, pursuant to Sections
2635.204(d)(1)and 5501.111  of Title 5 of the Code of Federal
Regulations.   Failure to provide the requested information will
result in the denial of the request for approval. Falsification of
the information required to be reported for this purpose may
subject the employee to disciplinary action by the employing
agency or other appropriate authority.  Knowing and wilful
falsification of information required to be reported may also
subject the employee to criminal prosecution. The primary use
of this information is to allow HHS supervisors and ethics
officials to make necessary determinations concerning
employee requests to receive awards. The information is also
requested, pursuant to 5 C.F.R. §§ 2638.203(b)(9), (10), and
(11), for the purpose of evaluating ethics program
administration, as well as the Department’s supplemental ethics
regulations, to determine their continued adequacy and
effectiveness in relation to current agency responsibilities and to
ensure that prompt and effective action is taken to remedy
violations or potential violations, or appearances thereof, of
conflict of interest and related ethics provisions. Additionally, this
information may be disclosed to: (1) the Office of Personnel
Management, Office of Government Ethics, Merit Systems
Protection Board, Office of the Special Counsel, Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission, Federal Labor Relations
Authority, Federal Service Impasses Panel, Federal Mediation
and Conciliation Service, and an arbitrator, in carrying out their
functions; (2) a Federal, State, or local  agency charged with
investigating  or prosecuting violations of, or implementing, the
law, in the event there is an indication of a violation or potential
violation of civil, criminal or regulatory law; (3) a Federal, State,
or local agency  maintaining enforcement records or other
pertinent records, such as current licenses, if necessary to
obtain a record relevant to an agency decision concerning the
hiring or retention of an employee, the issuance of a security
clearance, the letting of a contract, or the issuance of a license,
grant or other benefit; (4) the National Archives and Records
Administration or the General Services Administration in records
management inspections; (5) the Office of Management and
Budget during legislative coordination on privacy relief
legislation; (6) Federal agencies with power to subpoena other
Federal agencies’ records; (7) a court or party in a court or
Federal administrative proceeding if the Government is a party
or in order to comply with a judge-issued subpoena; (8) private
firms with which the Department may contract for the purpose of
collating, analyzing, aggregating or otherwise refining records;
(9) a Member of Congress or a Congressional office, pursuant to
an inquiry made at the request of the individual who is a subject
of the record; (10) the Department of Justice in defense of
litigation; and (11) contractors and other non-Government
employees working for the Federal Government to accomplish a
function related to an Office of Government Ethics
Government-wide system of records. This form will not be
disclosed to any requesting person unless authorized by law.
See the OGE/GOVT-1 Government-wide executive branch
system of records.
NIH����� �Rev ������ Page �of�Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
Review Committees 2021
https://www.dandavidprize.org/about/review-committees/review-committees-2021[3/2/2021 11:41:53 AM]Prof. Philip Greenland
Center for Arrhythmia Research
Feinberg School of Medicine
Northwestern University
Chicago, IL
USA

Prof. Fred Binka
School of Public Health
University of Health and Allied Sciences
Hohoe, Ghana

Prof. Daniel Cohen
Head of the School of Public Health
Sackler Faculty of Medicine
Tel Aviv University
Israel

MOLECULAR MEDICINE
Prof. Mary-Claire King - Chairperson
Division of Medical Genetics
Department of Medicine
University of Washington
Seattle, WA
USA

Prof. Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet
Head of the Genetics Department
Institut Curie
Paris, France

Prof. Huda Zoghbi
Molecular and Human Genetics
Baylor College of MedicineReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E]
To: Simmons, Linda (NIH/OD) [E]
Cc: Gross, Avraham (NIH/OD) [E] ; Park, Sherri (NIH/OD) [E]
Subject: RE: 204(d) Review Request
Date: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 9:45:08 AM
Attachments: image001.png
Thanks, Linda.  I agree that this can be approved.
Gretchen
Gretchen H. Weaver, J.D.
Supervisory/Senior NIH Ethics Counsel
DHHS/OGC/Ethics Division
phone:
fax:
NOTICE:  THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), ETHICS DIVISION IS INTENDED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE
USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S) NAMES ABOVE AND MAY CONTAIN PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT SHOULD
NOT BE TRANSMITTED TO UNAUTHORIZED ADDRESSEES.  IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, ANY DISSEMINATION,
DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER
IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.  EMPLOYEE RECIPIENTS ARE COUNSELED THAT DISCIPLINARY ACTION FOR VIOLATING FEDERAL
ETHICS REGULATIONS MAY NOT BE TAKEN AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE WHO HAS ENGAGED IN CONDUCT IN GOOD FAITH RELIANCE UPON
THE PRIOR ADVICE OF ANY AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL, PROVIDED THAT THE EMPLOYEE HAS MADE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL RELEVANT
CIRCUMSTANCES.  IF EMPLOYEE CONDUCT IS POTENTIALLY SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL SANCTIONS UNDER CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND
RELATED STATUTES, RELIANCE OF THE ADVICE OF AN AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL IN INTERPRETING THE SCOPE OF SUCH STATUTES IS A
FACTOR THAT MAY BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN EXERCISING PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION.
EMPLOYEES ARE CAUTIONED THAT DISCLOSURES TO AN OGC ATTORNEY ARE NOT PROTTECTED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT BY
ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE.  ALL EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING AGENCY ATTORNEYS, ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS TO
THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.
From:  Simmons, Linda (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov>
Sent:  Tuesday, March 23, 2021 7:12 AM
To: Weaver, Gretchen (NIH/OD) [E] < @od.nih.gov>
Cc: Gross, Avraham (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov>; Park, Sherri (NIH/OD) [E]
<@ n i h . g o v >
Subject:  204(d) Review Request
Hello Gretchen,
Attached is the final award package for Dr. Fauci for the Dan David Prize.  I followed up with
Avraham and Sherri and we have determined that the Dan David Prize is the sole sponsor for the
prize and all of their virtual events and not the Tel Aviv University.  The Dan David Prize also
confirmed that their relationship between them and the Tel Aviv University has not changed since
2011.  Since the Dan David Prize is the type of entity which merely issues prizes, it would not be
affected by Dr. Fauci’s official responsibilities.  Dr. Fauci responses of the 5501.111 included in the
package will suffice because there are no other subcomponents which need to be evaluated since
the sponsor which merely give out prizes would not likely have any CRADAs, grants, or other
business which could be affected by Dr. Fauci.  I’ve also attached his updated 2854 with theReleased by Chairman Rand Paul
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
From: Charlotte Halle
To: Simmons, Linda (NIH/OD) [E]
Subject: RE: Dan David Foundation
Date: Thursday, March 4, 2021 3:41:33 AM
Hi Linda,
Yes, the Dan David Foundation funds both the event and the symposium.
Best,
Charlotte

From:  Simmons, Linda (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov>
Sent:  Wednesday, March 3, 2021 10:08 PM
To: Charlotte Halle < @tauex.tau .ac.il>
Subject:  Re: Dan David Foundation

Thanks for getting back to me.  When I say sponsor, I'm talking about who provides the funds to organize the event for the award ceremony and the
symposium? In this case it's the Dan David Foundation, correct?
From:  Charlotte Halle < @tauex.tau.ac.il >
Sent:  Wednesday, March 3, 2021 2:52 PM
To: Simmons, Linda (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov >
Subject:  RE: Dan David Foundation

Hi Linda,
Everything is scaled down this year because of the pandemic and no on-the-ground visit.
Therefore, this year, the attendant events include an online award ceremony for laureates and a symposium, which the Prize organizes. I’m not sure what you mean by
the word sponsor. Might it be easier to speak by telephone, so we can clarify?
I am largely available tomorrow if that would suit you.
Best wishes,
Charlotte

From:  Simmons, Linda (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov >
Sent:  Tuesday, March 2, 2021 7:48 PM
To: Charlotte Halle < @tauex.tau.ac.il >
Subject:  RE: Dan David Foundation

Hello Charlotte,

I just wanted a little clarity on the events being scheduled virtually surrounding the prize.  We are asking for a list of events and sponsors so that we can determine the
Dan David Foundation is sponsoring all of the events that Drs. Fauci and Rosenberg are required to attend.

Linda D. Simmons

From:  Charlotte Halle < @tauex.tau.ac.il >
Sent:  Monday, March 1, 2021 9:17 AM
To: Simmons, Linda (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov >
Cc: Dan David Prize < @tauex.tau.ac.il >
Subject:  RE: Dan David Foundation

Dear Ms. Simmons,
Thank you for your email.
First I will confirm that there have been no changes to the Prize since 2011, when the Dan David Prize was previously approved. To answer your specific questions:
1. The attendant events include an award ceremony for laureates and a symposium in the laureate’s field of expertise, attended by experts in the field, students
and members of the general public.  This year, due to the pandemic, the events will be online/virtual.
2. Participation in these events is requested by the Dan David Foundation and is a condition stipulated by the founder of the Prize.
3. There have been no changes in the relationship between the Dan David Foundation and Tel Aviv University since 2011 in relation to the Prize and the information
on our website is correct.
Released by Chairman Rand Paul
4. The Review Committees are indeed independent from the university and are chaired by leading international experts in their field. The names of the 2021 Review
Committees can be found on our website here .
5. The guidelines outlined on our website are indeed the guidelines that the Dan David Prize Board uses to select all our laureates.
Please let us know if you have any further questions.
Best wishes,
Charlotte Hallé

Charlotte Hallé
Director
Dan David Prize
Office:
Mobile:
Email: @tauex.tau.ac.il
Website: www.dandavidprize.org

From:  Simmons, Linda (NIH/OD) [E] @nih.gov >
Sent:  Wednesday, February 24, 2021 11:31 PM
To: Dan David Prize < @tauex.tau.ac.il >
Subject:  Dan David Foundation

Ariel Porat and Charlotte Halle

My name is Linda Simmons and I represent the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Ethics Office.  I am assigned to review the 2021 Dan David Prizes for the Future Time
Dimension in the Field of Molecular (Dr. Rosenberg) and the Present Time Dimension in the field of Public Health (Dr. Fauci).  The federal ethics regulations require that
they receive an ethics clearance to accept the gifts associated with this award.  Previously in 2011, our Office of General Counsel (OGC) approved the award(s) from the
Dan David Foundation Prizes recognizing past, present, and future achievements and I have been given the task of confirming that the information the organization
provided in 2011 is still the same.

1)      What are ALL of the attendant events mentioned on the web site (i.e. the “couple of online events surrounding the prize” mentioned in the letters to Drs. Fauci
and Rosenberg)? Can you provide a list of all of the virtual events mentioned in your letters.

2)      The letter Drs. Fauci and Rosenberg received indicates that “we” (e.g. the letter authors) will be asking them to participate in a couple of online events.  We
need to confirm that the award donor only (Dan David Foundation) was requesting they attend these online events and not the Tel Aviv University?

3)      We need to confirm whether anything has changed in the relationship between the Dan David Foundation and the Tel Aviv University in relation to the prize.
As of 2011, we were able to confirm that the prize is "owned” by the Foundation and the university “merely” provides support. It states on your website
https://www.dandavidprize.org/about/about-the-prize  that the Dan David Prize is an international award, endowed by the Dan David Foundation and
headquartered at Tel Aviv University.  Is this information still accurate?

4)      Regarding the review panels, the members of the panels for the 2021 awards are not listed on the web site.  We need this information (for both NIH recipients)
in order to, hopefully, confirm independence from the university.  Can you provide us a list of the members of the review committee for 2021 and their
affiliation that was responsible for reviewing the Present Time Dimension in the field of Public Health for Dr. Fauci and the Future Time Dimension in the field of
Molecular Medicine for Dr. Rosenberg?

5)      Regarding the selection criteria, the web site indicates that the Board makes the final decision, based on the recommendations, as to which nominee(s) have
achieved the purpose the selected “dimension” is intended to honor. Are the guidelines for selection as stated on the web site about being considered on merit
and impact in their relevant field are the same and were considered

Summary:
Watcher-discovered document from paul-readingroom (7.24.2026_Fauci-Awards_FINAL_REDACTED.pdf), auto-indexed 2026-07-27.

Excerpt: From:"Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>To:"Conrad, Patricia (NIH/NIAID) [E]" < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject:FW: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019Date:Wed, 10 Oct 2018 16:31:24 -0400Importance:NormalI will explain.,From: Barton Haynes, M.D. <@duke.edu>Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2018 3:34 PMTo: Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] < @niaid.nih.gov>Subject: Re: Confirmation of your nomination for The Shaw Prize in Life Science and Medicine 2019You bet!!!Let’s do itBest  bSent from my iPhoneOn Oct 10, 2018, at 11:23 AM, Fauci, Anthony (NIH/NIAID) [E] <@niaid.nih.gov> wrote:Thanks, Bart.   There is another one that looks possible for me if you are willing to do it.  As usual, I will supply all of thematerial.   It is the Dan David…