Yes! I'd love information about IC on subcontracts.  The squeeze is always
on to simply pass through the subcontract.  It's tempting to do that for the
PIs and not so tempting for the University. All comments would be much
appreciated.
Susan Steiner
Cal State L.A.
 ----------
|From: Research Administration Discuss
|To: Multiple recipients of list RES
|Subject: Re: Subcontract Indirect Cost Rate
|Date: Monday, October 28, 1996 4:14PM
|
|On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Research Administration Discussion Group wrote:
|
|> We at the Desert Research Institute (part of the Univ. &
|> Community College System of Nevada) are considering
|> changing our current subcontracting overhead rate policy.
|> Currently we charge 15% up to the Federal max as
|> prescribed by A-21.  This is a lower rate than our
|> negotiated Federal o/h rate.  This was established years
|> ago by our VPF&A.
|>
|> I would like as much input as possible on the method or
|> percent (%) other universities/colleges/research
|> non-profits are using for charging overhead to subcontracts
|> (where we are the prime).  I would like as many responses as
|> possible in order to summarize what practices (or
|> percents) are used across the country.  If you are using
|> your full overhead rate up to $25K as prescribed in
|> A-21, let me know that too.
|>
|> If anyone is interested in the results, let me know and
|> I'll send the summary to you.
|>
|> Thank you in advance for you input.  I need this
|> information by the end of the week.
|>
|> John Case
|> Assistant Vice Pres. & Controller
|> Desert Research Institute, Reno Nevada
|> (702) 673-7396
|> xxxxxx@maxey.dri.edu
|>
|
|
| At Creighton University, we use the full overhead rate on the
|first $25,000 of a subcontract.
|
| I would like a copy of your survey results.
|
|Thanks.
|
|Karen
|
|************************************************************************
|*    Karen Anderson                     (402) 280-2289  phone          *
|*    Creighton University               (402) 280-2380  fax            *
|*    2204 Burt Street                                                  *
|*    Omaha, Nebraska  68178                                            *
|*                                                                      *
|*                      xxxxxx@creighton.edu                           *
|************************************************************************
|
|------ Message Header Follows ------
|Received: from gate1.health.state.ny.us by cslanet.calstatela.edu
|  (PostalUnion/SMTP(tm) v2.1.6 for Windows NT(tm))
|  id AA-1996Oct28.161406.1135.133591; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:14:07 -0800
|Received: by gate1.health.state.ny.us id AA28103
|  (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for xxxxxx@CSLANET.CALSTATELA.EDU);
|  Mon, 28 Oct 1996 18:00:23 -0500
|Message-Id: <xxxxxx@gate1.health.state.ny.us>
|Received: by gate1.health.state.ny.us (Internal Mail Agent-2);
|  Mon, 28 Oct 1996 18:00:23 -0500
|Received: by gate1.health.state.ny.us (Internal Mail Agent-1);
|  Mon, 28 Oct 1996 18:00:23 -0500
|Date:         Mon, 28 Oct 1996 07:59:56 -0600
|Reply-To: Research Administration Discussion Group
|              <xxxxxx@health.state.ny.us>
|Sender: Research Administration Discussion Group
|              <xxxxxx@health.state.ny.us>
|From: Research Administration Discussion Group
|              <xxxxxx@health.state.ny.us>
|X-From:       Karen Anderson <xxxxxx@CREIGHTON.EDU>
|Subject:      Re: Subcontract Indirect Cost Rate
|X-To:         Research Administration Discussion Group
|              <xxxxxx@albnydh2.health.state.ny.us>
|To: Multiple recipients of list RESADM-L <xxxxxx@health.state.ny.us>
|In-Reply-To:  <xxxxxx@gate1.health.state.ny.us>
|
|