Thinking about my thread this morning on why independent research is hard, and what it would take to make it possible, and whether it’s within the reach of private investors who ALL complain endlessly about how they have far too much capital and don’t know where to put it.https://twitter.com/vgr/status/1195789557465153536 …
-
Show this thread
-
On one extreme you can think UBI, which is roughly ~ early grad student level $. On the other extreme, you could think of early career faculty grants. An NSF CAREER grant is 100k/year for 5 yrs, and in 2018, about 150 million was disbursed or about 300.
1 reply 0 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
A subset of ~20 get PECASE awards which push up the 100k to 500k/yr, sp that’s another 40 million. This 190 million basically supports 300 new faculty every year which I think is approximately ALL new faculty in say the top 25-30 universities.
2 replies 0 retweets 9 likesShow this thread -
At grad student stipend level, you’re talking about a quarter that. 25k/year. So you could support about 1200 grad student level researchers for the same amount. So $19- million gets you somewhere between 300 to 1200 bets on independent researchers. Now who can afford that?
3 replies 0 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @vgr
Nearly all universities have about 50% overhead or more on grant money, so half that # is more accurate. But for independent funders they could specify no overhead
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GregNN
I address that separately elsewhere in the thread. Indirect cost support is added on top, not taken off the base grant iirc. So for a 100k fed grant, researcher gets 100k and univ another 50k on top I believe. It’s been a while but that was how the books used to be done iirc.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Indirects come out of the budget. E.g., when I budget for a $500K award, UW takes ~50% of that to partly pay for research administration, utilities, building maintenance, janitorial staff, wifi, etc. Someone has to pay for those things.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
I think there's no disagreement here, we were just arguing about book-keeping labels. When I was in academic research, people talked about the indirect cost support as an on-top line item computed directly via the prevailing federal rate (which was ~53% back then)
-
-
Yes basically. the only relevant detail is, if federal money gets cut in half for overhead, but private money can give to uni and specify no overhead, then private can fund ~50% more people, compared to same dollar amounts from NSF. Makes it even better for private to give
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Actually it's even better, private funds double the people, jetlagged whoops.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.