Re: Flow Down Clauses Gregory Schmidt 16 Nov 2001 20:08 EST
I would not do a subcontract for a consultant's work. The difference between a sub and consultant is in their activity and it's relationship to the Statement of Work (SOW). A consultant guides, aides or provides other technical or professional service to the PI. While they may impact the results of the SOW, they do not conduct work resulting in the satisfaction of a portion of the SOW. A subcontractor, on the other hand, conducts a part of the SOW and is responsible for the outcome of that work. Also, a consultant is not defined by their corporate identity (e.g., the idea that persons get consultant agreements while companies get subs is incorrect). I've seen a sub go to an individual - not often, but it does happen. One case was when the individual was constructing and maintaining a web page. This was a stated objective of the award, i.e.. it was in the SOW. I gave him a subcontract. I've also done professional service agreements (consultants) with companies. One was doing testing of airfoils in a wind tunnel. This was not a stated objective which was, as I recall, to design and build a certain type of wing that met certain drag and turbulence coefficients. While we couldn't have met the objectives without the testing, all the testers did was tell us the numbers and we determined whether we had achieved the objective. They did not do any design or construction. Greg Stephen Erickson wrote: > I think we should go one step farther in this. It's true that consultants should > not receive the same type of agreement as we would send to subcontractors --- > but it is crucial that agreements are executed with consultants. They are > normally very restrictive in terms of intellectual property and other > considerations. They should be done on a fixed price or daily rate basis, and > should in virtually all cases be done on a work-for-hire basis. > > "Baumann, John" wrote: > > > No, in my experience is neither necessary nor, quite frankly, advisable. > > After all, the consultant does not have the same responsibilities to the > > funding source that the grantee does. > > > > John R. Baumann, Ph.D. > > Director > > Office of Sponsored Programs & Research Support > > University of Missouri -- Kansas City > > 5100 Rockhill Road > > Kansas City, MO 64110 > > > > 816.235.1303 (v) > > 816.235.6532 (f) > > xxxxxx@umkc.edu > > > > location: 5211 Rockhill Road > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gloria Greene [mailto:xxxxxx@EMAIL.UAH.EDU] > > Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 1:55 PM > > To: xxxxxx@HRINET.ORG > > Subject: [RESADM-L] Flow Down Clauses > > > > I have a question, when issuing a subcontract to a CONSULTANT, is it > > necessary to flow down the prime contract clauses? > > > > Gloria Greene > > Assistant Research Administrator > > UAH, Office of Research Administration > > voice: (256) 824-2657 > > fax: (256) 824-6677 > > ====================================================================== Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists") ======================================================================