Though the benefits of the research enterprise far outweigh the costs, many in the field recognize that there are improvements that would make the system more efficient and cost-effective. The federal government assumes a great deal of the administrative and financial burden of research in America; being accountable to taxpayers and American citizens in this regard requires continuous analysis of policies and procedures to ensure adequate stewardship of public trust. Towards this agenda, three organizations (the Council on Government Relations (COGR), the Association of American University (AAU), and the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU)) joined forces to provide recommendations “for regulatory reform that would improve
…show more content…
The second recommendation specifically looks at Effort Reporting and Cost Accounting Standards. According to Berkeley’s Controller’s Office, “effort reporting is a process mandated by the federal government to verify that direct labor charges to, or cost shared on, sponsored projects are accurate, timely, and reflect the actual level of work performed.” [3] However, the 2011 report found that none of these agendas were being met by Effort Reporting and as such, simply creates more work without adding value or enhancing accountability. These organizations also claimed that Cost Accounting Standards similarly lack value or accountability as they strive to “provide guidance on cost practices for educational institutions in the administration of financial management of a sponsored award.” [4] While I agree with the suggestion that the federal government should eliminate regulations which do not add value or enhance accountability, I would argue that Effort Reporting and Cost Accounting Standards are not good examples. Effort Reporting is a burdensome task for universities but it allows for departmental and central office administrators to hold Principal Investigators (PIs) accountable to the appropriate distribution of the effort on sponsored research. Without Effort Reporting, it may not become apparent until it is too late that a PI has inaccurately charged his/her effort on a research project. This regulation provides a tool for the research administrator to communicate effectively with the PI and oversee without appearing nitpicky or controversial. Similarly, Cost Accounting Standards serve to keep PIs and research administrators out of jail for inappropriate costing activities. Consequently, my critique of this recommendation is that it references poor examples. The value of these
The second recommendation specifically looks at Effort Reporting and Cost Accounting Standards. According to Berkeley’s Controller’s Office, “effort reporting is a process mandated by the federal government to verify that direct labor charges to, or cost shared on, sponsored projects are accurate, timely, and reflect the actual level of work performed.” [3] However, the 2011 report found that none of these agendas were being met by Effort Reporting and as such, simply creates more work without adding value or enhancing accountability. These organizations also claimed that Cost Accounting Standards similarly lack value or accountability as they strive to “provide guidance on cost practices for educational institutions in the administration of financial management of a sponsored award.” [4] While I agree with the suggestion that the federal government should eliminate regulations which do not add value or enhance accountability, I would argue that Effort Reporting and Cost Accounting Standards are not good examples. Effort Reporting is a burdensome task for universities but it allows for departmental and central office administrators to hold Principal Investigators (PIs) accountable to the appropriate distribution of the effort on sponsored research. Without Effort Reporting, it may not become apparent until it is too late that a PI has inaccurately charged his/her effort on a research project. This regulation provides a tool for the research administrator to communicate effectively with the PI and oversee without appearing nitpicky or controversial. Similarly, Cost Accounting Standards serve to keep PIs and research administrators out of jail for inappropriate costing activities. Consequently, my critique of this recommendation is that it references poor examples. The value of these