So says the AAAS (the american association of the advancement of science, the big science organization in the US). The outlays of grants directly to institutions actually decreases money available for grants for people not at those institutions. Scientists survive on grants from the NIH and NSF; when that funding is cut, scientists leave the field. The problem with pork (one problem) is that's not peer-reviewed, that the grants are given directly to institutions for unclear purposes. Whereas peer-review grants ensuer that good ideas get funded.