I have a first-time NIH grant PI with a question about an "unwritten rule" on no-cost extensions.  She is requesting her first no-cost extension, and under expanded authority I can grant that to her and enter it in the NIH Commons electronically.  She has been told by other researchers  at a large research university that if she has more than 20% of her funds left it cannot be done this way because she will have to provide justification to NIH.

I cannot find anything anywhere about this alleged 20% rule; in fact a no cost extension is supposed to be based on work remaining to be done, not on funds.  However, I asked her to ask her colleagues where they obtained their information, and they tell her the rule is unwritten.  Before I call NIH and potentially sound like an idiot asking about unwritten rules, I thought I'd ask my wonderful colleagues.

Are you aware of the "unwritten 20% rule?"  If it exists, does it pertain to R-15 AREA grants?  Or, is it a vestige of a pre-expanded-authority world?

Thanks for any help you can provide.

Landy

----------------------------
Landy C. Johnson, MPA, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Economics and Geography
Director of Grant Development
Assumption College Provost Suite
500 Salisbury St., Worcester, MA 01609-1296
508-767-7666
xxxxxx@assumption.edu

======================================================================
 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.healthresearch.org (click on the
 "LISTSERV" link in the upper right corner)

 A link directly to helpful tips:  http://tinyurl.com/resadm-l-help
======================================================================