7 ms·

One of the biggest problems with overheads is that administrators are frequently simply unable to explain or justify them. The vast majority of research-active

One of the biggest problems with overheads is that administrators are frequently simply unable to explain or justify them. The vast majority of research-active universities in the US are non-profit, and so it doesn't really make sense to say that the universities is "profiting" off of overheads. Overheads are also negotiated with each funding agency, and my understanding is that the university has to prepare a fairly detailed case to support their particular number. They can't just make something up. But overhead rates can vary fairly significantly between similar institutions. And when, as a faculty member, you start asking questions about why, you're frequently met with defensiveness, nonsense, or both. When I worked in the Northeast, I remember someone claiming that our overheads were 10+% higher than another institution due to... snow removal. (Which wasn't that effective either.) Overheads also seem to only go up. Because of course. Provide a reasonable justification for why you're charging me a certain amount, and how the money gets spent, and we're cool. I understand the university is a complex place and there's a lot involved in supporting what I'm doing. But when you can't provide a reasonable explanation, people start to wonder why not.

nightfly 3y ago
> Overheads also seem to only go up Inflation says hello
- advisedwang 3y ago
  Overhead is $ of overhead of $ per grant, so this isn't inflation, it's a higher proportion of grants going to admin vs research.
- diziet 3y ago
  Significantly higher than inflation, too.
  - Fomite 3y ago
    I mean, on a per grant basis, the direct costs (and thus indirects) for a non-modular NIH R01, which is probably the most common form of grant, haven't changed since the Clinton era.
iamerroragent 3y ago
I'm perplexed what the problem is here? My partner works in grant management for a public r1. I believe the rate the university gets is about .57. That pays for facilities and education programs and funding the department itself. Bringing in money makes the university happy and your pay check bigger though the accounting on it sounds obnoxious and not always guaranteed (salary cuts to cover overruns, etc). However if you think about it, That's probably about how much private employees make for their employer anyways if not more. Annoying but hey that's the way the system is, you're getting paid to make someone else more money.
- freetime2 3y ago
  > I'm perplexed what the problem is here? It sounds like there is a large potential for corruption and waste with such an opaque system.
  - andrepd 3y ago
    You've just described capitalism, for better or worse.
  - iamerroragent 3y ago
    Not really. Though researchers love to buy big expensive sample fridges or other equipment when they're ending a project and need to spend anything left over in the projects funds. Is that waste to you?
    - freetime2 3y ago
      I was referring to the "overhead" portion, which it sounds like the researchers are not able to access.
      - iamerroragent 3y ago
        So? Either spending is wasteful or it isn't. People don't work for free and the money is accounted for. For example the Federal government and public universities negotiate a rate at which F&A (overhead, facilities and administrations) can be at. Then the Federal government, since they're paying for it, ask for receipts. The money is being accounted for.
yunohn 3y ago
> are non-profit, and it doesn't really make sense to say that the universities is "profiting" off of overheads IMO “non-profit” is a misnomer. It only implies that the organisation’s owners (funders, equity holders, etc) do not take a profit. It does /not/ mean that the people involved don’t make money - income, fees, admin overhead, building/contracts/employment favoritism, etc. There are infinite ways to leech money that don’t involve taking “profits”.
- mattmanser 3y ago
  It's literally what the company setup means. You can allege that people in every non-profit are committing fraud, but it's not a misnomer.
  - prasadjoglekar 3y ago
    A better way to phrase the parent's frustration is to say that "non profit" is strictly a tax status. Colloquially, we have expanded the meaning to mean a charity or other selfless endeavor. No doubt many non profits do perform charitable acts, but plenty more are just glorified tax shelters.

nightfly 3y ago

> Overheads also seem to only go up Inflation says hello

advisedwang 3y ago
Overhead is $ of overhead of $ per grant, so this isn't inflation, it's a higher proportion of grants going to admin vs research.
diziet 3y ago
Significantly higher than inflation, too.
- Fomite 3y ago
  I mean, on a per grant basis, the direct costs (and thus indirects) for a non-modular NIH R01, which is probably the most common form of grant, haven't changed since the Clinton era.

iamerroragent 3y ago

I'm perplexed what the problem is here? My partner works in grant management for a public r1. I believe the rate the university gets is about .57. That pays for facilities and education programs and funding the department itself. Bringing in money makes the university happy and your pay check bigger though the accounting on it sounds obnoxious and not always guaranteed (salary cuts to cover overruns, etc). However if you think about it, That's probably about how much private employees make for their employer anyways if not more. Annoying but hey that's the way the system is, you're getting paid to make someone else more money.

freetime2 3y ago
> I'm perplexed what the problem is here? It sounds like there is a large potential for corruption and waste with such an opaque system.
- andrepd 3y ago
  You've just described capitalism, for better or worse.
- iamerroragent 3y ago
  Not really. Though researchers love to buy big expensive sample fridges or other equipment when they're ending a project and need to spend anything left over in the projects funds. Is that waste to you?
  - freetime2 3y ago
    I was referring to the "overhead" portion, which it sounds like the researchers are not able to access.
    - iamerroragent 3y ago
      So? Either spending is wasteful or it isn't. People don't work for free and the money is accounted for. For example the Federal government and public universities negotiate a rate at which F&A (overhead, facilities and administrations) can be at. Then the Federal government, since they're paying for it, ask for receipts. The money is being accounted for.

yunohn 3y ago

> are non-profit, and it doesn't really make sense to say that the universities is "profiting" off of overheads IMO “non-profit” is a misnomer. It only implies that the organisation’s owners (funders, equity holders, etc) do not take a profit. It does /not/ mean that the people involved don’t make money - income, fees, admin overhead, building/contracts/employment favoritism, etc. There are infinite ways to leech money that don’t involve taking “profits”.

mattmanser 3y ago
It's literally what the company setup means. You can allege that people in every non-profit are committing fraud, but it's not a misnomer.
- prasadjoglekar 3y ago
  A better way to phrase the parent's frustration is to say that "non profit" is strictly a tax status. Colloquially, we have expanded the meaning to mean a charity or other selfless endeavor. No doubt many non profits do perform charitable acts, but plenty more are just glorified tax shelters.