Research business models subcommittee cos nstc summary of activities
1 / 9

Research Business Models Subcommittee, CoS, NSTC Summary of Activities - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Research Business Models Subcommittee, CoS, NSTC Summary of Activities. NSF Business and Operations Advisory Committee. Geoff Grant October 22, 2003. Research Business Models Subcommittee*. Goals:

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Research Business Models Subcommittee, CoS, NSTC Summary of Activities' - fifi

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Research business models subcommittee cos nstc summary of activities

Research Business Models Subcommittee,CoS, NSTC Summary of Activities

NSF Business and Operations Advisory Committee

Geoff Grant

October 22, 2003

Research business models subcommittee
Research Business Models Subcommittee*


  • facilitate a coordinated effort across Federal agencies to identify and address important policy implications arising from the changing nature of scientific research

  • examine the concomitant impacts these changes have had or should have on business models and business practices for the conduct of scientific research sponsored by the Federal government and carried out by academic, industrial, and government entities

  • *

Research business models workgroups
Research Business Models:Workgroups

  • Common Practices Among Agencies

    • Chair: Tom Cooley, CFO, NSF

  • Alignment of Funding Mechanisms with Scientific Opportunities

    • Co-Chairs:

    • Nat Pitts, Director, Integrative Activities, NSF

    • Christine Chalk, Program Analyst, DOE

  • Appropriate Costs of Research Enterprise: determination, recovery, accountability

    • Co-chairs:

    • Chuck Paoletti, ONR

    • Belinda Seto, Acting DDER, NIH

Request for information due october 6 2003 summary

Total Comments


Federal Agencies/FFRDCs


Industry/Small Business








Request for InformationDue October 6, 2003 Summary

* AAU, NASULGC, COGR, AAMC, AIRI, FDP, 3 animal welfare associations, etc.

Regional meetings
Regional Meetings

  • Berkeley- Lawrence Livermore

    • Alignment of Funding Mechanisms with Scientific Opportunities

    • October 27, 2003

  • Minneapolis- University of Minnesota

    • Common Practices Among Agencies

    • November 12, 2003

  • Chapel Hill- University of North Carolina and Duke University

    • Appropriate Costs of Research Enterprise: determination, recovery, accountability

    • November 17, 2003

  • Washington, D.C- RBM

    • Priorities and Next Steps

    • December 9-10

Preliminary themes of public comments
Preliminary Themes of Public Comments

  • Align Funding Mechanisms with Science:

    • Develop new policies and business arrangements to foster development, use, and continuous improvement of shared facilities and equipment

    • Foster more cross-disciplinary support for special facilities and Federal labs, e.g as in NIH use of synchrotron facilities

    • Increase support for specialized, shared instrumentation, especially MRIs, PET, and mass spectrometers

    • Examine sufficiency of funding for “mid-size” multi-investigator funding

    • Improve peer review oversight, extend its use more broadly, and coordinate inter-agency communication on project funding

    • Implement a Federal facility loan guarantee program as recommended in NIH report

Preliminary themes of public comments1
Preliminary Themes of Public Comments

  • Common Practices:

    • Reaffirm principles of the partnership

    • Avoid overemphasis on “business models”, research is not a business

    • Reconcile principles, cost reimbursement, regulations and operating policies, and audit practices

    • Emphasize evaluation based on outcomes, not accounting

    • Eliminate existing barriers (political and practical) for projects that transcend disciplines and specific agency missions

    • Research administrative practices can be aligned with based on types of science and support, e.g single projects, investigator portfolios, multiple, collaborating investigators, and multidisciplinary, multi-agency projects

    • Establish one eGov. solution, not multiple agency solutions

    • Reaffirm Bayh-Dole tech transfer principles and minimize agency specific limitations of rights

Preliminary themes of public comments2
Preliminary Themes of Public Comments

  • Appropriate Costs of the Research Enterprise:

    • Admin. cap, salary cap, caps on stipends and tuition costs, and elimination of the Biomedical Research Support Grant are inconsistent with basic objectives and shifts legitimate research costs to awardees

    • Increases in compliance costs cannot be borne by recipients alone without impairing the research enterprise

    • The cap on reimbursement of administrative costs and related cost-shifting are central issues that must be addressed in any discussion of Federal-academic business models

    • The principle of full cost reimbursement is vital for the partnership to be successful

    • Modify A-21 to allow direct charging of administrative services directly linked to the performance of research

Next steps
Next Steps

  • Synthesize Comments and Agency Perspectives

  • Prioritize Issues

    • Short term low hanging fruit

    • Longer term, even more critical issues

  • Design Implementation, Assign, Follow up, Implement

  • Bring Issues Back to the B&O Advisory Committee

    • Prioritizing?

    • Sanity Check?

    • Endorsement?

    • Facilitating Solutions?