NIH slashes overhead payments for research(science.org) |
NIH slashes overhead payments for research(science.org) |
Altering the deal on existing contracts without notice is very much NOT a good idea. That they're attempting to do so is a pretty good sign of bad faith.
A $8M grant doesn’t cost a university any more than a $1M grant for university admin in terms of “indirect costs”. The fact that they think they’re entitled to several million of it to waste on things that shouldn’t be coming from taxpayer funded NIH grant money is obscene.
Sure it does. An 8M grant is going to have roughly 8X more researchers working under it than a 1M grant. Each of those researchers needs space, parking, IT support, HR supports, etc. There are some economies of scale, but the idea that you could increase the staffing of a business by 8x and not have to hire more HR and accounting people is silly.
This isn’t some conspiracy theory. Look at how much grant money a given university brings in annually and ask yourself if 30-60% of that number is being spent on overhead related to research. It’s not.
I wonder if it is possible for them to connect funding to a maximum allowed ratio of admin to prof / lectures
This detail is worth highlighting. NIH has traditionally borne the bulk of indirect costs, allowing non-profits to issue grants with low indirect costs. Slashing NIH’s indirect costs will force research institutions to seek funds elsewhere or become financially unviable.
How can they possibly shoulder the costs with their $40,000/yr tuitions and multi-billion dollar endowments?
The original grant notice is a good thing to read. They properly justify the cuts, and I think it's something that a lot of people would agree with - why is up to 70% of grant money being sent to "administration and overhead" at giant private universities? My small LLC is currently applying for an SBIR grant, and we were capped to 40% unless we provided a big justification - which we can't, because we're too small to justify anything like that. Meanwhile, big organizations and universities can throw their weight around and bully the government into handing them more money to do who-knows-what with. Maybe build a nice shiny new sports center with.
This is a good reform - even though it will cost my LLC about $75k in indirect costs that we might have been able to bill (40% -> 15%). I'm more confident in my ability to reduce our indirect costs and compete on a level-playing field with everyone else.
Also, indirect costs are not going to building sports centers. Funding agencies and the government audit universities in detail to make sure that the money is being spent only on research activities, down to calculating the amount of square footage per building that is being used exclusively for research, as opposed to instruction or clinical work. They have absolutely come after people and institutions, and successfully obtained multimillion dollar settlements, for using federal money to cover unrelated expenses. If NIH indirects were found to be going towards something like building a rec center or a facility for college athletes, it would be actual fraud and a national scandal, potentially on the “congressional inquiry” level.
When the country is $1,830,000,000,000 further in debt every year, universities will simply have to figure it out.
I suggest cutting their bloated administrations, to free up tuition and endowment funds for their actual purpose.
The federal budget (save DOD and entitlements) is stuff like this.
Saying “oh well, it’s just 0.25%” is the reason why nobody can tackle the deficit.
Do this 100x and you’ve suddenly reduced the deficit by 25%.
They'll lean on international students first like they have for decades, but those numbers are going to be down. They'll follow that by leaning on undergrads, but those numbers are shrinking too because of cultural and demographic shifts. Then they'll cut graduate funding (again) to try and get more blood from the stone. Then they'll try cutting the "extraneous" departments that don't bring in money or grants (read: everything except engineering, medicine, law, and football) again. Then they'll cut the departments that do bring in money. Then they'll do the work to shoulder the costs directly.
If you want reform, cutting funding doesn't work. It hollows out the entire institution before it even starts addressing the administrative issues. Reform needs to come from a different direction.
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-25-0...
We have a saying in Japan that goes: "Even dust piled up will make a mountain."
Considering the monies concerned here are also tax dollars, I am wholly unsympathetic to the actual monetary sums. They could be 1 cent and my feelings on this matter wouldn't change: Audit every single line item and slash anything wasteful.
Collateral damage is unavoidable, and more importantly I don't care about collateral damage since we are finally getting the audits and cuts we the people demanded for way too long.
I understand the concerns around using funds effectively, and I agree there's a lot of waste out there, but some of that is just required in the research space to learn. If we knew what to fund to do something, it's no longer research, it's engineering.
Overhaul the grant system to ensure that there's additional scrutiny in getting funding, focus on outcomes we want, audit the past research, but burning it all down doesn't help and just wastes what's currently in flight and we'll have to rebuild eventually, duplicating effort and thus wasting money.
I understand the emotional reaction, but it would do everyone a lot of good to take a step back, take a deep breath, and approach things in a measured and focused way.
What a wonderful phrase that came into prominence to euphemise the killing of hundreds of thousands to millions of innocent Afghans and Iraqis.
I believe your use of it here is equally appropriate considering what you’re suggesting.
I’m guessing none of you our your loved ones will be affected by that “collateral damage”.
Fixed that for you. Pharma companies do lots research. But the goal of that research is very narrow - to bring new therapies to the market. The Academy has very different goals - train next generation of researchers and make discoveries. IMO, expecting a pharma company to do the work of an academic institution is a recipe for failure. But that is just an opinion.
NIH does not pay full salary support for many junior and senior scientists even if they work 100% on NIH projects. That is indirect support by the institution to NIH.
15% will kill academic medical research — the fountain head of a much or most progress we have made in preventing and treating a wide range of diseases.
I was first surprised that NIH put indirects on top and wondered if they were done NSF style if that would help control costs more.
If the rate wasn't set in this way, the overhead would be well above 100%, as it is in most labor-heavy businesses like consulting and law.
Look at a consulting company or law firm. Most will charge you 2-3x the salary cost of the consultant or lawyer you're getting. This limits universities to 1.15x.
Full disclosure I’ve dealt with this all first hand. The vast majority of universities contribute next to nothing to research programs except the space, utilities, and IT. And those costs do not need to be a % of incoming grant money.
And the vast majority do just take that cut and use it as slush fund general revenue.
Our physics group had access to the shared LN2 tank. It was no fee, so if you needed a few liters you could just grab it. That could be replaced with a debit system which goes directly to the account. (Hmm, and who decides how much to charge?)
We got hazmat training, and the environmental safety officer was paid by the university through overhead. That could instead be billed directly to the grant. (Hmm, and who decides how much to charge, and how much training is needed?)
When we installed a projector on the ceiling we were able to get building services to install the mount through the air plenum. That service could instead be billed directly against the grant. (Hmm, and who decides how much to charge?)
We could book time in the sound studio to record voice-overs for one of our projects. That was free, but could be billed directly against the grant. (Hmm, and who decides how much to charge?)
Some relevant materials, believe it or not, are not yet digitized, but are available in the library stacks. I could just walk there and read it, because library support was part of the overhead, but you're right - it doesn't need to be that way. The library could charge per entry and book. (Hmm, and who decides how much to charge?)
I'm sure other departments have their own needs, like maintaining the herds for the ag school, or the instruments for the music department.
I don't know how you could have dealt with this all first hand and not see just how much more the university provides than "space, utilities, and IT."
I've dealt with this first hand because I'm a PI myself. I hate having to waste my valuable time dealing with the inventory person every couple months, but we do it because our funding sources require that kind of accountability.
Space, utilities and IT can be significant costs. There are also the standard costs of personnel for the people working under these grants (HR, Accounting, Purchasing, etc.) Add onto that the significant compliance requirements.
When the government hires a consultant, they usually pay 2-3x the salary of the consultant in per-hour costs. This rule limits them to 1.15x the salary of the employee.
See e.g. https://www.cogr.edu/sites/default/files/1991%20Excel%20Data...
I still voted for him.
Why? Because his policies are things the people have demanded for a very long time and they are things we need to do sooner or later for the better future of our country.
Even Musk admitted this will be painful in the short and possibly even mid term, but in the long term we will all be better off for it.
These organizations can and will adapt. But as I said in my OP, the real, lasting damage is in prestige. In the meantime, scientists all over the world thinking about working in the US will think twice. Young adults thinking about becoming research physicians and doing biomedical research will think twice. Researchers making peanuts working at universities doing this research will go work in pharma on more lucrative projects.
Midterms are coming up in less than 2 years, and the next general in less than 4. Time is of the essence to get shit done so the people can decide if they want more or a change in course.
>lasting damage is in prestige.
Pride is a deadly sin for a reason, screw pride. We make America great again by striving for greatness, not puffing ourselves up with pride.
Consider sitting this one out.