There are some conditions that must be met for this to work.  The
original institution appoints another person to be the PI of record at
that institution.  Then the Grant is not actually transferred.  The
original institution gives a subcontract to the new institution with
the original PI  now the PI for the subcontract.   All work done at the
original institution is the responsibility of the original institution
and  work done at the new institution is the responsibility of the new
institution, as with any sub contract.  There is still the bothersome
details of setting up the sub contract and the indirect cost to the
original institution is now lowered by the amount of the sub contract
(minus the exclusion amount).

How is this different from any sub-contract?  I do wonder about the
idea of the original PI, at the new institution, being a consultant on
the grant.  How much time is involved and is that amount available for
consulting?  Is there any institutional costs to the new place.  The
original PI cannot be a consultant on a grant for which he is a PI so
the original place appoints a new PI -- does that person then have to
put effort into the project?

Bob
On Feb 11, 2005, at 11:48 PM, Baumann, John wrote:

> I guess I am lodging a minority opinion here.  I don't really see the
> problem.  In fact, to some extent, why this is so much different than
> any other contract between a prime and a sub?
>
> I have been involved with a similar situation several times.  A PI left
> my institution during the last year of a grant. NIH, rather than
> approving a transfer, requested that we sub with the PI at his new
> institution.  We did so -- collected the appropriate  IACUC approvals,
> financial disclosures, etc.  The project went into no cost extension
> and
> the final reports, FSR and invention statement were submitted as easily
> as if from my institution.  I have recently had the same situation in
> reverse -- a PI left another institution and joined the faculty here.
> He had two NIH awards: one was transferred and the other, in its last
> year, was not but a subcontract was developed to cover his effort and
> misc. costs.
>
> I have also been involved with projects wherein the application was
> submitted with the PI paid via a subcontract -- although in each of
> these cases s/he had joint appointments at both the prime and
> subcontracting institution.
>
>
>
> John
>
> John R. Baumann, Ph.D.
> Associate Vice Chancellor for Research
> Director, Office of Research Services
> 5100 Rockhill Road  (US Postal Service)
> 5211 Rockhill Road (Courier Service)
> Kansas City, MO 64110
>
> 816.235.1303 (v)
> 816.235.6532 (f)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@HRINET.ORG] On
> Behalf Of Patricia Hagen PhD
> Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 1:59 PM
> To: xxxxxx@HRINET.ORG
> Subject: [RESADM-L] Remote PI?
>
> Good afternoon friends.
> One of the more creative divisions of our university has come up with
> an
> interesting new twist to avoiding grant transfers.  It's called the
> "remote PI."
>
> What this means is that when a faculty member leaves the institution to
> take a faculty position at another institution, this division proposes
> to keep the grant here at our institution and subcontract the PI work
> to
> the new institution.  Then, one doesn't have to go through "bothersome"
> grant transfer paperwork and also we get to keep paying people at the
> original institution off the grant.
>
> I think the whole concept is LOONY.  I see all kinds of compliance
> worries related to the situation where the institution which is
> responsible for the grant has a P.I. which is no longer its employee.
>
> The latest attempt at this creative approach involves a Department of
> State grant.  A predecessor approved the "remote pi" idea for this
> particular grant, but the Department of State is not completely
> comfortable with this, so they've come up with yet another
> alternative--they'll approve the "remote PI" situation if our
> institution contracts the work directly to the individual faculty
> member, and not to her new institution.  They could care less if the
> two
> institutions contract with one another!  Oy vey!  Am I on another
> planet?
>
> Please, colleagues, am I being too overcautious when I shout "NO!" into
> the phone?  Be honest.  I am all about service.
>
> Thanks,
> Patty Hagen
> Saint Louis University
>
>
> ======================================================================
>  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")
> ======================================================================
>
>
> ======================================================================
>  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")
> ======================================================================

======================================================================
 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")
======================================================================