A researcher at Imperial College London who was found dead in September had been told he was “struggling to fulfil the metrics” of a professorial post at the institution.

An email sent in March to Stefan Grimm, professor of toxicology in the Faculty of Medicine at the university, who died on 25 September, outlines the details of his “informal review process”, which include bringing in an “attributable share” of £200,000 per year in research funding and being awarded at least one programme grant as principal investigator in the following 12 months.

Professor Grimm was found dead in Northwood, Middlesex, in September, and an inquest was opened and adjourned at the West London District Coroner’s Court on 8 October.

The email, sent by Martin Wilkins, professor of clinical pharmacology and head of the division of experimental medicine at Imperial (published in full below), states that any “significant funding” attributable to Professor Grimm had ended, and that although applications for “many grants” had been submitted, Professor Grimm had “been unsuccessful in persuading peer-review panels that you have a competitive application”.

“Your dedication to seek funding is not in doubt but as time goes by, this can risk becoming a difficult situation from which to extricate oneself,” Professor Wilkins writes. “In other words, grant committees can become fatigued from seeing a series of unsuccessful applications from the same applicant.”

It continues: “I am of the opinion that you are struggling to fulfil the metrics of a Professorial post at Imperial College which include maintaining established funding in a programme of research with an attributable share of research spend of £200k [per annum] and must now start to give serious consideration as to whether you are performing at the expected level of a Professor at Imperial College.”

Professor Wilkins says that he is “committed to doing what I can to help you succeed and will meet with you monthly to discuss your progression and success in achieving the objective outlined”.

“You have previously initiated discussions in our meetings regarding opportunities outside of Imperial College and I know you have been exploring opportunities elsewhere,” he adds. “Should this be the direction you wish to pursue, then I will do what I can to help you succeed.”

The email constitutes the “start of informal action in relation to your performance”, Professor Wilkins states, and adds that should Professor Grimm “fail to meet the objective outlined, I will need to consider your performance in accordance with the formal College procedure for managing issues of poor performance”.

Professor Wilkins’ email - shared with Times Higher Education by Imperial - was distributed to a number of associates of Professor Grimm, and was sent from an email account in Stefan Grimm’s name. The email also contained what appear to be the final thoughts of Professor Grimm ahead of his death. The text of this section of the email has already been published in a blog by David Colquhoun, emeritus professor of pharmacology at University College London.

The message was sent on 21 October, several weeks after the death. But a spokesman for Imperial College said he had no reason to believe that the email, in Professor Grimm’s name, was not genuine.

It claims that Professor Grimm had been told he was to be dismissed by Imperial, and gives more detail about the terms of his informal performance review (the email is published in full below).

It also suggests that a PhD student that Professor Grimm had been planning to take on was to be told there was no longer a place available. “He waited so long to work in our group and I will never be able to tell him that this should now not happen,” the email says. “What these guys don’t know is that they destroy lives. Well, they certainly destroyed mine.”

A spokesman for Imperial said that, contrary to assertions elsewhere, Professor Grimm was not under formal review nor had he been given any notice of dismissal.

“It is standard practice in higher education institutions to conduct both informal and formal performance management. In this tragic case, the process was at the informal stage,” he said.

He added that all recipients of the message ostensibly sent by Professor Grimm had been contacted within 24 hours of receipt, and that the email had been shared with the authorities.

As part of the informal review process, “Martin Wilkins met with [Professor Grimm] on a number of occasions to see how the college could help him to develop competitive grant applications, for example, through internal peer-review, collaborations and letters of support,” the spokesman said.

“Discussions included talking about the best place for him to do his science, both inside Imperial and outside, and it is a fact that, with Professor Grimm’s permission, Martin made enquiries about opportunities on his behalf. During this period, at Professor Grimm’s request, members of the Faculty of Medicine provided extra help with grant applications and other support.”

He added that, as previously stated, “Imperial’s provost has asked the director of HR and one of the college’s senior elected academic representatives to review the relevant college policies and procedures.”

The report will be “considered by a senior group led by the provost and the college will move swiftly to implement any recommendations” he said.

chris.parr@tesglobal.com