(see quoted material at end)
Granting agencies are loath to grant to individuals. Hence the rules are that the grant goes to an instituition, but the "manager" of the funds is designated the "principal investigator" even though many other offices in the institution very very rapidly grab off their "cuts" and sometimes they will even grab the direct costs and not even tell you about it. You have to ASK for monthly statements and actually question each line. That is, unless the institution has two sets of books, one for THEM and one for YOU. And, usually, the PI has to get _permission_ to spend money on certain things, thus the PI is often not very _principal_ but quite subordinate in terms of authority to expend money off his own grant. One exception is SBIR grants which, instead of to large institutions, can go to a small company (as long as it can be legitamated) with a little as one employee. Hint, hint, hint. Arthur E. Sowers, PhD ----------------------------------------- | Science career information website: | | http://www.magpage.com/~arthures | ----------------------------------------- =========== no change to below, included for ref. & context ===== On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Rich Ulrich wrote: > On Tue, 17 Sep 2002 04:03:37 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote: > [ ... ] > > > > : It is an interesting observation. I have always wandered why granting > > : agencies prefer to deal with organizations rather than with > > : individuals > > Are you kidding? Are you naive? Isn't it obvious > on two seconds of reflection? > > I guess it is sort-of like the related fact, that > Banks don't want to give you a loan if you only have a > PO Box as an address, no co-signer, and no references. > > In addition to the 'dishonesty' factor, there's the idea that > a researcher should not have to be qualified as an accountant. > > > > : although the fact that some of the universities take up to > > : 100% for overhead is very well known. That is why research became so > > : expensive. And in general companies prefer consulting firms to > > : individual contractors. Again it increases the cost. > > > > <snip> > > > > I've found that out here in Canada. There's government money available > > for a researcher who's investigating a currently popular subject and who's > > affiliated with either a university or a company. Independent researchers > > are more likely out of luck. > > Or they can find a company that exists for the purpose of > administrating grants. A number of years before NIH was > doing very much, the State of Maryland legislated that > funding rule. "Friends of Psychiatric Research" administered > grants, and did nothing else -- it had been founded by doctors > from a state mental hospital. The hospital system decided not > to bother with grants, but their doctors still could. > > My first job was on a grant administered by "Friends". > So was my second. > > -- > Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html > . . ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at: . http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ . =================================================================
