Actually this is a good thing.  It means that you can recover your indirect
costs on $25,000 of the subcontracts that you have for specific programs.
I have checked into this before and was told that there is no written
guidelines concerning this matter.  This is something that has to be
negotiated in your Rate Agreement with DCA.  We previously did not have
this in our rate agreement and finally negotiated this into our contract
for the 1998 year.

As far as whether a contract is a subcontract or a consultant, I believe
that if you have a written contract whereby a third party is responsible
for certain direct costs and is entitled to indirect cost recovery for
their portion, and as long as you have a contract that meets the NIH
guidelines and criteria this would be considered a subcontract and not a
consultant.  See the Guidelines for Establishing and Operating Consortium
Grants for more details.  Hope this helps.

Candace

>Our indirect cost agreement specifies that we can not charge indirect
>costs on the portion of major subcontracts in excess of $25,000.  Am
>looking for a  more specific definition of “major subcontract”.  Have
>referenced A-133 section 210 and found the information to be vague –
>what a surprise.
>Was wondering what others use as criteria for determining whether a
>vendor is considered a major subcontractor or simply a consultant.
>
>
> 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")
======================================================================