Martha's query about small corporate grants makes me wonder: How often do
your institutions actually reject funds purely because they don't cover
full costs?  In my experience (albeit limited) the institution always finds
a way to rationalize taking the money.  It's hard to turn down money when
the other option is no money at all.

Just my opinion, but I think the basic policy that the institution shouldn't
take on any research project that costs them money is reasonable and anyone
desiring concessions should squirm and produce serious justifications.  I
think a policy that relieves the investigator of this process is another step
backward in the battle to present indirect costs as _real_ costs.

Tony Silbert
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center