Red alert: pick a college that will not be decimated by the NIH's reduction of indirect costs to 15%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You won't escape this at colleges. Trump is directly attacking universities and colleges generally, this is just one part of the plan.

Is this following the Project 2025 blueprint? If so, is there an easily accessible article or two outlining their plan re higher ed?

Really trying to get my head around this, including what we should know or consider in the short term for our 11th grade DC, who hasn’t yet chosen or applied to schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“That said, changing the model overnight will destroy the balance sheets of many institutions. It should have been phased in.”

They shouldn’t have been overcharging the taxpayers in the first place.

They were not overcharging. Stop making things up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“That said, changing the model overnight will destroy the balance sheets of many institutions. It should have been phased in.”

They shouldn’t have been overcharging the taxpayers in the first place.

They were not overcharging. Stop making things up.

Stop pretending that 30% or more for indirect costs isn’t overcharging.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You won't escape this at colleges. Trump is directly attacking universities and colleges generally, this is just one part of the plan.

Is this following the Project 2025 blueprint? If so, is there an easily accessible article or two outlining their plan re higher ed?

Really trying to get my head around this, including what we should know or consider in the short term for our 11th grade DC, who hasn’t yet chosen or applied to schools.

Here you go:
https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/project-2025-and-higher-education

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“They were not overcharging”

They were milking the grant for excessive overhead.

They don’t make any money on the overhead, it all goes to supporting the researchers, it’s a break even for the universities. It will decimate scientific research in this country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“That said, changing the model overnight will destroy the balance sheets of many institutions. It should have been phased in.”

They shouldn’t have been overcharging the taxpayers in the first place.

They were not overcharging. Stop making things up.

Stop pretending that 30% or more for indirect costs isn’t overcharging.

They don’t even break even at 60 percent. You’re clearly a MAGA idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You won't escape this at colleges. Trump is directly attacking universities and colleges generally, this is just one part of the plan.

Is this following the Project 2025 blueprint? If so, is there an easily accessible article or two outlining their plan re higher ed?

Really trying to get my head around this, including what we should know or consider in the short term for our 11th grade DC, who hasn’t yet chosen or applied to schools.

There won’t be a university in the country that won’t be affected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“That said, changing the model overnight will destroy the balance sheets of many institutions. It should have been phased in.”

They shouldn’t have been overcharging the taxpayers in the first place.

They were not overcharging. Stop making things up.

Stop pretending that 30% or more for indirect costs isn’t overcharging.

They don’t even break even at 60 percent. You’re clearly a MAGA idiot.

Have any of them EVER had an overhead rate audit? If so then cite the result.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“They were not overcharging”

They were milking the grant for excessive overhead.

They don’t make any money on the overhead, it all goes to supporting the researchers, it’s a break even for the universities. It will decimate scientific research in this country.

Overhead by definition does not go to the researchers it goes to the institution and I have yet to see proof what the exact break even would be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“That said, changing the model overnight will destroy the balance sheets of many institutions. It should have been phased in.”

They shouldn’t have been overcharging the taxpayers in the first place.

They were not overcharging. Stop making things up.

Stop pretending that 30% or more for indirect costs isn’t overcharging.

They don’t even break even at 60 percent. You’re clearly a MAGA idiot.

Have any of them EVER had an overhead rate audit? If so then cite the result.

I don’t deal with idiots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes you think biomedical research funding changes is going to have much impact on the undergraduate experience at any school? I can see biomedical PhD students and some medical students impacted, but college students?

The overhead goes to the universities as a whole. The university relies on it in its budget.

It supports overhead for biomedical research related activities and should not be supporting anything related to the undergraduate programs. NIH grants are primarily within the medical school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes you think biomedical research funding changes is going to have much impact on the undergraduate experience at any school? I can see biomedical PhD students and some medical students impacted, but college students?

The whole school is hurt. Professors often teach as well as do research. With less salary covered they need to cut other places including aid.

These grants largely go to the medical school and very few medical school faculty are involved with undergraduate teaching. The school that is hurt is the medical school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes you think biomedical research funding changes is going to have much impact on the undergraduate experience at any school? I can see biomedical PhD students and some medical students impacted, but college students?

The overhead goes to the universities as a whole. The university relies on it in its budget.

It supports overhead for biomedical research related activities and should not be supporting anything related to the undergraduate programs. NIH grants are primarily within the medical school.

It will affect all R1 and R2 universities. They are going to make the same change at NSF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Check https://ncses.nsf.gov/surveys/higher-education-research-development/2022#data

Colleges will be hurt. Those high on the list are going to be decimated. An immediated $100 million budget reduction.

Johns Hopkins, Penn, Michigan, UCLA, Berkeley, Wisconsin, etc.

The public schools are most at risk.

Are you dumb? Hopkins and Penn have extremely sizable endowments and can weather this easy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Check https://ncses.nsf.gov/surveys/higher-education-research-development/2022#data

Colleges will be hurt. Those high on the list are going to be decimated. An immediated $100 million budget reduction.

Johns Hopkins, Penn, Michigan, UCLA, Berkeley, Wisconsin, etc.

The public schools are most at risk.

Are you dumb? Hopkins and Penn have extremely sizable endowments and can weather this easy.

That’s not really how endowments work. PI’s need this money to fund grad students, otherwise there’s a shortage of instructors. There’s a certain budget allocated towards faculty and it’s unlikely there’s budget space for funding grad students.