Based upon my own experiences in Philadelphia at the Jefferson Medical
College, I believe that use of IDC rates between 20-30% on a TDC base is
common and reasonable for industry-sponsored clinical trials.  The notes
already addressing this topic are representative and well stated.  However,
I believe it is difficult to make direct comparisons with
federally-negotiated rates for several reasons.  I suspect some
institutions prepare their IDC proposals by removing clinically-based
studies from their base so that federally-negotiated rates may not be
comparable & applicable for clinical studies.  In addition, the MTDC base
in PHS rate agreements commonly eliminate patient care costs which can lead
to contentious discussions about what constitutes a patient-care cost on a
clinical trial (e.g. salaries for research nurses).  Also clinical space
may not be included in the IDC proposal.  Therefore, an alternative for
federal projects might be to charge for space/office rental as a direct
cost and then use the off-campus rate.  I'd be interested in hearing from
others that have explored this issue in more detail from a cost-accounting
perspective.

Terry A. May, Ph.D.                       Voice:    602-523-6788
  Director of Research Administration     FAX:      602-523-1075
  Office of Grant & Contract Services     INTERNET: xxxxxx@nauvax.ucc.nau.edu
  100 Babbitt Admin. Ctr., Box 4130
  Northern Arizona University
  Flagstaff, AZ  86011-4130