So, I have a question about the 15% overhead thing, and it’s this: does anything prevent grant receiving institutions from refactoring proposals to make up for this in direct costs? It would make the process much less efficient, mean more admin, etc., but is that a viable response?
My recollection is that there are laws about not charging for that kind of stuff on federal grants. No admin assistance, equipment, etc. Those would have to change.
That seems not to be the case for NIH grants though. What I’m wondering is whether this will mean restructuring so that the university starts charging labs for, e.g., compute infrastructure, and that goes in as a direct cost. Massively less efficient.
I think that it depends on what is supposed to be covered in your negotiated rate agreement. If computer infrastructure is included under that agreement, you cannot also include it as a direct cost. Institutions would need to renegotiate the specific covered costs in the rate agreement.
That makes sense. But that’s going to have to happen anyway if we’re going to a 15% max. That’s simply not going to pay for operating expenses.
So I guess my question is whether we’re moving to an environment where a lot less funded research happens, or one where it still happens but there’s a lot more itemized expenses and a corresponding drop in efficiency. And probably more administrators required to make it work. 🤷🏻♂️