If you really want to "go to the source" on federal definitions of grants
and contracts, you should look at the Federal Grants and Cooperative
Agreement Act (31 USC 6301 et seq.). It describes what's a grant and
what's a contract. This is where A-21, FAR, and any other Federal
documents derive their definitions. If you look closely at most Federal
award documents, you'll probably see a reference to this US Code
citation.
Briefly, FGCA says a contract is something where the principal purpose of
the instrument is to acquire property or services for the direct benefit
or use of the Federal Government, and an assistance agreement (either
grant or cooperative agreement) is something where the principal purpose
of the relationship is to transfer something of value to the State or
local government or other recipient to carry out a public public purpose
of support or stimulation that isn't principally for the direct benefit
or use of the Federal Government. The difference between a grant and a
cooperative agreement is that the coop. agreement has substantial Federal
involvement.
Pat Hawk
Sponsored Projects Administrator
Research Services and Administration
University of Oregon
xxxxxx@orsa.uoregon.edu (new e-mail address)
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Grant v. Contract -- definitions
Author: Research Administration Discussion List <xxxxxx@hrinet.org> at
GATEWAY
Date: 2/10/99 12:17 PM
At 11:37 AM 2/10/99 -0800, Rochelle Athey wrote:
>Can anyone point me toward a document that outlines the differences
>between a grant and a contract? Definitions of both would be handy.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Rochelle Athey
>Sponsored Programs Director
>Cal Poly State University Foundation
>xxxxxx@calpoly.edu
>
PL 95-224.
This defines a FEDERAL grant or cooperative agreement as "Assistance", and
a contract as "Procurement". These differences mean that federal grants
follow completely different rules (A-110) than federal contracts (FAR). We
consider ourselves lucky that the cost principles (A-121 and FAR 31.3,
respectively, are identical.
I describe this difference to my faculty as:
In a grant you plan to get to F by way of A,B,C,D, and E, -- but if things
dont work out, you may have to go via B1 and C2, and in fact, may find that
the only destination that is viable is F3.
In a contract you commit to get to F only by way of A,B,C,D, and E, -- and
if things don't work out, STOP WORK AND RENEGOTIATE!
Don't forget that the Comptroler of the Currency, back in the 1940's
stated, "A grant is a contract," the point being that the terms of a
federal grant can be enforced at law as a contract.
Beyond that, there's little guidance. The central research administrator
MUST look at each as an "agreement" -- that's my general term, and using it
works. On the whole, if it is called a "grant", the PI has more
flexibility than if it is called a "contract", and there is folk myth among
faculty members that somehow, a grant is better than a contract. On the
other hand, lots of agreements use both "grant" (sometimes "grant-in-aid")
and "contract" internally, referring to the agreement at hand. (Lots of my
state agencies do that -- VERY confuising to the faculty member.)
As a central administrator, remember that your job is to make sure the
agreement meets the needs at hand, and that its language can be enforced in
court.
Chuck
======================================================================
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")
======================================================================
