Excellent explainer on why the NIH indirect rate cut matters, as well as why it is illegal. - ThreadSky

ThreadSky

About ThreadSky

jamalgreene.bsky.social • 29 days ago

Excellent explainer on why the NIH indirect rate cut matters, as well as why it is illegal.

Reposted from Sam Bagenstos

Indirect Costs and Trump's Attack on Independent Voices.

My latest post:

buttondown.com/sbagen/archi...

Comments

jmortj5.bsky.social•28 days ago

This is the real trickle down economics effect.

rumpolebayou.bsky.social•29 days ago

This should get pushback

Universities were willing to toss away DEI, but this is taking their money

ibipelican.bsky.social•28 days ago

There is a congressional law that says congress needs to make this change not NIH alone and these rates are negotiated for a 5 yr contract. Hopefully these big universities will push a class action lawsuit to rectify this.

leskatspr.bsky.social•29 days ago

It seems like, on the surface and to someone unfamiliar with this process, its similar to construction on a cost plus basis.

eznark.bsky.social•28 days ago

“NIH says that its cut in indirect costs will save the agency $4 billion per year”

The low end average annual appreciation on Harvards $57 billion endowment could cover this gap every year for the entire country, by itself.

Taking 70% in overhead for federal grants is ridiculous.

quadrapole.bsky.social•28 days ago

For existing grants, these funds have already been allocated by Congress. Nothing is saved.

eznark.bsky.social•28 days ago

Money approved should be disbursed. Moving forward capping overhead costs is fine. “Research grants” shouldn’t be used for capital expenditures.

For comparison, most of the federal Covid grants that went out for economic development had a 5% cap on overhead.

criticallyspeaking.bsky.social•28 days ago

Exactly. Very insightful

Posting Rules

Be respectful to others
No spam or self-promotion
Stay on topic
Follow Bluesky's terms of service

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply