So now we get a glimpse of some of the money at the worker and drone bee level. Would any of APS's academic types care to help us understand how the grant business works?
On paper, typically, a grant is offered of X amount in a specific or general area. Proposals are written and tendered for consideration. The proposals are evaluated using fair, unbiased and procedural methods to determine the "best" proposal(s) who are then awarded the money, resources, et al specified in the grant.
In reality, it's often a political byzantine system of fiefdoms, patronage and favor-peddling. Grants are often awarded on who sucks up the best, likelihood of generating further funding to the grant issuer, or is guaranteed to deliver the goods (ie only give results that match the ideology of the grant issuer). Little is fair or unbiased. Don't get me wrong, there are grant sources that are fairly above-board. DARPA and DoD, some private foundations, etc. Non-military government grants? Oh gods, the horror, the horror. Well, not always, but pretty often.
Math and physics grants are generally above board. Further you get away from the 'hard sciences' (ie provably true or false), the more corrupt it gets. By the time you're getting to sociological, wedge issue science and art... it's nothing but corruption.