At 09:00 PM 3/15/99, Chuck wrote:
>
>Lee, you proposal has great merit.  The cost-benefit is obvious.  Our most
>cantankerous "customer" is the U.S.Gvt.  I cannot think they would agree to
>something so practical, because somewhere, somewhen, some poor schmuck who
>signs such a clause will be castigated for waste fraud or abuse for
>"giving" away Uncle's money.
>
>Industrial sponsors might be a good market fot this approach.  We have not
>considered it at VCU because almost every project we do for industry is
>fixed price or fixed unit price (based on, essentially, a time-and-effort
>model for reaching our estimate).

Chuck,

Stanford agrees with you about the Government - the concept of materiality
does not exist for NIH and most others. ONR and a couple of other agencies
are a bit more enlightened, but generally we're resigned to chasing pennies
for them forever.

Cost-reimbursement and fixed-price contracts are no problem for us at all.
Nor are minor cost over-runs on any agreement; Stanford has procedures
whereby the department can absorb cost over-runs to balance the books.

The problem is primarily with Foundation and other Non-Government grants
which are paid on a payment schedule and have terms requiring the return of
unobligated balances. If, despite our best efforts, the PI leaves a few
dollars in the account, we have to return it.

How do folks deal with that?

Lee
*****************************************
R. Lee Wood
Team Lead, Medical School Team
Grant and Contract Accounting
Stanford University
651 Serra Street, Room 110
Stanford, CA 94305-6215
Phone: (650)723-5681
Fax:   (650)725-4598
Email: xxxxxx@stanford.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.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists")
======================================================================