The following excerpt from a summary of a May 17th Nature article, has a message that complements what I found in a paper published a couple of years ago (see the reference at the bottom of this entry).
Do charities like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation produce better medical research than institutions supported by the government?
. . .
. . . , some scientists believe philanthropies make better use of that $5 billion than corporations or governments, says Nature’s Meredith Wadman. Many researchers have stories about nonprofits who rescued risky but useful projects that had been shunned by government-backed institutions. Charities can make decisions more quickly and can take bigger risks. Philanthropists also tend to closely monitor their investments and want the satisfaction of a mission accomplished.
For the full summary, see:
(Note: ellipses added.)
The reference to the Nature article is:
My related paper is:
Diamond, Arthur M., Jr. "The Relative Success of Private Funders and Government Funders in Funding Important Science." The European Journal of Law and Economics 21, no. 2 (April 2006): 149-61.