A question about funding a facility.
What if you ran a core facility. Your mission statement is to provide
cutting edge molecular biology services etc. It also states that the
facility should run in chargeback mode and the objective would be to have
zero dollars left at the end of the fiscal year. This is probably a good
description of a majority of ABRF facilities. Now, what if because of
unanticipated cost savings, whether by protocol changes, dropping of
service contracts etc., there has been a net
accrual of funds at the end of the year. Money that has been taken in from
researchers to purchase supplies and maintain the facility in cutting edge
condition is at least temporarily in a positive cash flow. A business
would have no problem with this situation. The company would use the
excess cash to enhance and modernize itself. (I won't even comment on
bonuses). But to a core facility this can be perceived as a problem. From
talking to other core directors that found themselves in this situation
I've heard several results. One director had to divide all the excess
money and cut checks for all the researchers. I've heard of others who
have found ways to use the excess to modernize their facility (I just
can't find any at the moment). And herein lies the question. If you have
found yourself in this situation and your institute
allowed you to purchase enhancements to your facility (capital equipment),
could you post the justifications that you used? My institute accounting
is unsure of the idea of accrued funds in a facility being used for
equipment
purchases. If I was able to show them examples of other facilities that
found ways to do this without raising the ire of either the Institute or
NIH bean counters I can undo a logjam of uncertainty.
Why ombudsman? I don't want "no" for an answer.
Thank you,
Successful but Sleepless
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 30 2000 - 07:51:55 EDT