Most research is funded by grants, most research is done by people working on getting their P.H.D. or other graduate studies. These grants are the main incomes of most researchers, so most bid on the research projects with the most liberal funding, or longest grant periods.
Professors sort thru students, and match them to grant funded research, based mostly on skills, talents, interests, and abilities as viewed by the assigning professor. There are some politics played in the background in some cases I'm sure. Status is sought by most as part of the outcome of the project, pinning their future careers, on the value seen in their work, making a name for them selves etc...

There are surges in funding approved by government agencies , politics play a heavy role in where the funds go, by both subject, and schools picked. For instance the Dr. Gray and the hurricane forecast funding is getting iffy lately with a couple of really dry seasons, that were predicted as normal levels of activity, that did not develop at all.

Currently it is the studies being pushed to prove, or disprove the global warming, and the importance of the human side, of the process, that is drawing the political support. They seem to have abandoned the El Nino process, when they could not work out models, for it that worked well. Now we are in a cooling trend for the past almost 10 years, and funding is just starting to shift gears, (more changes will be seen after the elections are settled).

Global power production / consumption and fossil fuels are the current power tools, of the rich and powerful, people and nations. Soon it will be water quality, and the efficiency of photosynthesis of solar energy into food, that will take center stage, as the population grows further, and energy sources, get sapped dry.

I have spent over 20% of my annual income in this endeavor, and over 40,000 man hours, (mostly on nights and weekends) in the past 30 years, (just the web site start up costs are now about $9,000.00) and have received only ridicule for "wasting my life", on some thing that was "proved wrong" back in the 50's in the highly political pursuit of monies available for modeling budgets, every one now in the upper echelons of the NWS got there because of their early posturing of them selves into the leading edge of the technique as it formed.

It is my opinion that more data needs to be added to the mix to get a cake, than flour, sunlight, heat, and water, I am proposing adding some sugar, and a couple eggs, to the mix.

The pattern I have found was intended by me, to be used as a base reference, for grounding the models in reality, so the "butter fly effects of the out of control", feedbacks did not get that way. I cannot tell "the experts how to do their job".

I have not been able to reach the ears of the NWS, because there are gatekeepers that require substantial degrees, and university support before grants can be applied for, or papers can be submitted, research published, screened by peer review, and then the internal politics of that whole system.

Very few people who want to be successful, run against the wind and get anywhere, most just go with the flow, and follow the cash, till retirement. I have just pushed on knowing it works, and have faith that some day it will be recognized for what it is.
So far only one person has clicked on the link to the forecast web site, from this forum, in the past 10 days it has been posted here. (according to Gooogle)