no-20-grant-clinic-moving-grant-to-a-new-institutionhtml

Home Back Issues No. 20: Grant Clinic: Moving Grant to a New Institution

Mar 15

2010

No. 20: Grant Clinic: Moving Grant to a New Institution

Posted by: PIA in

Tagged in: Untagged

Grant Clinic:

Moving Grant to a New Institution

Reader Question: I am moving to another institution. Am I able to move my grant to this new organization? If so, what steps do I need to take?

Expert Comments:

Yes, the grant can be moved, and here is the procedure:

Because the grant is awarded to your institution and not to you as PI, the grants-management officer, program officer, and institutional representatives must agree on where the grant will reside ultimately.

If the grant fits best at the current institution, assigning it to a co-investigator may be necessary for completion of project goals. The sponsoring agency (NIH, NSF, DOD) must be notified as soon as possible. This paperwork takes time, so allow four to six weeks for the transfer. You may need to request a re-budget for you to subcontract at your new institution for continued work and collaboration on the project.

If you want the grant moved to the new institution, you must initiate the transfer. The first step is obtaining approval from your current institution to relinquish the grant. Each institution and its sponsored-programs unit will have specific individuals designated to approve grant transfers. These likely will include the dean and department chair, but also may include individuals at a higher level, perhaps in the administration. Of course, all co-investigators and grant-related individuals also must be notified.

Once the transfer is approved internally, your current sponsored-programs unit will:

1) determine the exact amount of unspent funds,

2) decide whether the cost-sharing commitment has been met,

3) review any subcontracts to determine their completion status and notify the subcontractors of the intent to move the grant,

4) review any agreements for equipment purchases to determine whether any capitalized equipment should be transferred,

5) determine ownership of technology developments or intellectual property (IP), and

6) review personnel commitments to determine whether a subcontract needs to be set up back at the original institution to allow them to continue their work on the grant.

Next, you must begin the application process with the new institution’s sponsored-programs office by providing:

1) a copy of the initial proposal,

2) initial award notice,

3) progress reports,

4) an outline of the new scope of work once the grant is transferred,

5) a detailed budget with the fringe and indirect rates of the new institution and any cost-share commitments.

The sponsored-programs office then submits the required documents to the funding agency along with the letter of relinquishment from the original granting agency. Once approved, the grant is re-awarded to the new institution.

Comments by Tina Shinkovich, BA, a grants director with more than 20 years’ experience with pre- and post-award grant processes in both academic and nonprofit organizations. She currently is grants manager at the Blanchette Rockefeller Neurosciences Institute at West Virginia University.

Here are agency Web sites offering specific information for transferring a grant/change of PI:

NSF – http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf08_1/aag_index.jsp

NIH - http://grants2.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps_2003/NIHGPS_Part7.htm#_Toc54600127

NIAID - http://funding.niaid.nih.gov/ncn/sop/changepi.htm

Enjoy this article? Sign Up to receive these free every week

This eAlert is brought to you as an informational training tool by the Principal Investigators Association, which is an independent organization. Neither the eAlert nor its contents have any connection with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) or the National Science Foundation (NSF), nor are they endorsed by these agencies. All views expressed are those personally held by the author and are not official government policies or opinions.

[ Back ]

Comments (19)

...
written by Anonymous, March 14, 2010

When the PI in the lab neighboring ours left for his new post in a neighboring state, he loaded up a U-Haul trailer and stripped his old place clean. I mean he carted off everything-all glassware, half-filled bottles of reagents, all the ofice supplies from his desk, etc. Oh, and this was about 10PM on the weekend.. (But he took nothing "big",like a fume hood or an elctron microscope.) Still, it seemed to me he must be violating some legal or societal etiquette. Should I have called the campus police? I confess I just kept my head down and my mouth shut.

...
written by Anonymous, March 16, 2010

Interest Read!

...
written by Richard Zhao, March 17, 2010

The explanation is not consistent with the answer. The accurate answer should be "It depends upon the decision from the institution", i.e., it is "Yes" if the institution agrees; or "No" otherwise. If the grant will stay, the institution has to sign another PI, not co-investigator" upon approval of the funding agency.

...
written by Anonymous, March 17, 2010

I have just completed this processâ€¦ it took me over a year to transfer my grant to my new institution! In theory, transferring an award should be easy and the steps outlined are accurate. Frankly, this is the first time I have ever seen the process outlined in such a straightforward mannerâ€¦ Trust me, I have looked. Thank you Tina. Administratively and in practice this process can be a nightmare. This is especially problematic if you are moving from a research institution / school to one less familiar with and/or skilled in grant award administration (which is a true skill). Lessons I learned? 1) This is much more work than it appears, so be prepared, 2) donâ€™t assume everyone knows how to do this, make sure you are following the steps, 3) get as much done as you can before you move, and, most importantly, 4) KNOW YOUR NEW INSTITUTIONS GRANT ADMINISTRATION PROCESSES, POLICIES, AND PEOPLE. I would recommend staying in constant contact with you new institutions officials to make sure things are happening. Remember, they do not know you and you do not know them or their systems, protocols, and procedures. Once your former institution officials have signed off on your transfer that it, they are done. Now it is up to you to make sure the money get to your new institution. This can be an extremely frustrating. I hope to never have to do this again.

...
written by Anonymous, March 17, 2010

A related question, in case any readers have insight on this. Who owns the equipment that was purchased from the grant, particularly computers and software, and can these be taken to the new institution? Can the current institution claim any rights to such equipment?

...
written by Experienced, March 17, 2010

1. The procedure described above is only accurate with respect to Investigator-Initated NIH awards (R01, R21, etc.) and not to multi-investigator awards (P01, P30, P50, etc.) which because they are dependent on the institutional context are not movable. 2. NIH, at least, also must approve the transfer of the award and the new host institution must agree to accept it. As noted above, the first step is to get approval of the transfer from the current awardee institution. 3. Any institution that has not established the policy that it owns all equipment, furnishings, etc. purchased with external grant or contract funds is not living up to its fiduciary responsibility or its responsibility to protect and maintain institutional integrity. 4. If the U-Haul, or in my case semi-trailer, is in the process of being loaded, call the Sheriff to report a theft in progress. If the load is in transit or in another location, the Sheriff should bring it back at the the thieve's expense. 5. Institutions have a responsibility to make good policy, publicize it to their faculty investigators, and enforce it. How will you explain to an NIH auditor that equipment, etc., purchased with grant/contract funds is missing? A tradition of "institutional generosity" is not likely to be an acceptable answer. 6. Does anyone know how to spell "FBI?"

...
written by Anonymous, March 17, 2010

I think in general Ms. Shinkovich has provided very useful information for PI's, who may have plans to move. However, based on my experience, the transfer of a grant to another Institution needs to be planned very carefully. Things, which need to be considered before the transfer include move of researchers, who are supported by the grant, purchase of major equipments, and other laboratory purchases. In reality, everything, which was purchased from the grant funds and are needed to continue the proposed research work, can be justified for the transfer. In case, postdocs (or a staff) are not able to move and are not able to find another position, their salary support may be charged to grant for some period (there is a limit). Additionally, the parent institution would wait for few weeks (up to 90-days) to make sure that no payments are due for the purchases that were made in the recent past. In reality, it may take at least 3-6 months to transfer a grant to new Institution. Therefore, the PI needs to be prepared for an interruption in research. Sometimes, this interruption results in reduced research productivity. Therefore, experiments and publications need to be planned at least a year before the transfer to maintain the research productivity.

...
written by Anonymous, March 17, 2010

2010-03-17 11:02:18.000
written by Anonymous, March 17, 2010

We have just been through this where a grant was transferred to another institution. How much is transferred (i.e. lab reagents, equipment etc) depends on the contract between the institution and the granting agency. In our case the first institution where the grant was being transferred from owned all of the equipment (by contractual agreement) that was purchased by the granting agency. So legally the transferring institution makes the decision about what will be transferred. In our case the only equipment that was approved for transfer was equipment not being used by other faculty for research and teaching, which was not very much. Also, samples were not transferred unless the faculty member that was leaving could provide signed informed consents from each participant that their samples would be transferred which the PI was unable to do. So, very little equipment and very few samples were transferred. I would suggest to "ashamed" that the person who backed up a U-haul and moved equipment at 10 PM certainly violated ethics and possibly the law if the transfer was not approved through formal channels. In our situation the chair, dean, provost, general counsel and vice provost for research were a part of the approval process for transfer. Another wrinkle was the faculty member that was leaving has some ethical challenges and a challenging personality too, so it was not an enjoyable process. It took about 18 months to complete the transfer.

...
written by Anonymous Too!, March 17, 2010

I performed my first and only move a few years ago. It was definitely the most stress I've ever experienced in my life so far. On the other hand, once you have experience in the matter, you realize looking back that it does not have to be that way next time, as most parties involved just have a bigger bark than a bite. According to the rules, the university/ academic institution owns absolutely everything. However, it is rare for them to reassign an R01 type grant to another PI locally because most R01's are heavily connected with the expertise of the PI who is moving. And yes, there is a tradition to let the funds move because there are as many funds moving out as there are moving in. However, this is all at the discretion of the institution so the PI has be play nice. The problem is that some institutions/ departments (cannot name them!) try to hold hostage one's R01 funds by forcing the PI to relinquish other funds or equipment from private sources such as private funding agencies or private donors. The university owns all the equipment etc. from those too but has a an easier time justifying (through creative accounting) keeping that equipment or funds for their own use or that of other investigators in the department. They may in some cases want to negotiate that equipment or funds for you to get their signatures on the forms to move your R01 funds. I'm hoping this is not a widespread practice but be warned that the whole process can be ridiculously stressful if the participants want it to be. The PI of the grant is completely at the mercy of the institution he/she is leaving and that is why it is very stressful. It's extremely difficult obtaining NIH funding in the first place and the prospect of losing it during a move can be very stressful. Any equipment purchased through departmental start up funds is typically non negotiable (ie. it stays) unless it has no value whatsoever to other investigators in the department. Under no circumstances can any equipment be moved without proper authorization (the story of a 10pm move sounds surreal to me) unless the PI wants to risk jail time. It would amount to theft. I suspect in that case the lab was very small, I can't imagine moving any decent size lab without professional movers and co operation of facilities staff. My final advice, negotiate a good start-up package at the new institution in consideration of all the stress, downtime and risk to your research funds you will no doubt experience. Next time I move, I will request an even heftier start up to compensate for the stress- it's definitely one of the big reasons I'm in no rush to make a move ever again. Good luck.

...
written by koi, March 17, 2010

@ashamed: taking the glassware & office supplies while cheesy doesn't seem to be that big of a deal. I moved my grant between two big institutions with highly professional & experienced staff who did most of the work. They already had the list of the equipment and let me take most everything. I paid for the equipment bought with dept. funds (at depreciated rates). Overall, it was a positive experience. I do know people whose chairpersons/colleagues were greedy and reluctant to grant them their equipment as they changed institutions. I personally find this unethical (while legal) and petty - an institutional theft of resources a PI needs to do his job. Did they spends months writing that RO1?

...
written by moving out, March 17, 2010

My institution traditionally tosses out phenomenal quantities of glassware, benchtop items, and even fridges, floor-standing centrifuges, etc. when labs close or move. It makes more sense to recycle internally, or to allow the PI to transfer many items elsewhere if they'll otherwise be trashed. Some sponsors (non-NIH) specify that the work is to be performed by a particular PI, and will withdraw the funding from the original institution if the PI moves.

...
written by Curious, March 17, 2010

What about indirect costs? What if your current institution only has 55% indirect cots for your R01 grant, but the place you are moving to has a 100% indirect cost. I heard NIH will not change the total money awarded. Then it means you suffer a huge loss in your direct cost.

...
written by Molly Greene, March 17, 2010

To the excellent list in the article, I would add: If using humans and/or animals in your grant, contact the new IRB/IACUC as soon as you begin making plans to move. They should be able to smooth the process so approvals are in place shortly after your arrival, if not upon arrival.

...
written by Interesting, March 17, 2010

Well, these comments from PIs are quite pessimistic about moving a grant. Is this the typical risk-aversion attitude that all of us academics suffer from (I guess it stems from having to please our PI as a graduate student and then appease everyone else until we are finally tenured) or it it valid concern. I am currently a PI on three NIH grants and have considered a move recently. A colleague of mine recently moved - and it was messy - but I think he took all of his money. If it so difficult, how do so many people make the moves? It seems to me that if the parent institutions do indeed have so much control that they would exercise this option frequently.

...
written by MAL, March 18, 2010

Well, I guess the question is really what ethically should be done? The purpose of the government issuing the grant is for the public good, not to make Universities wealthier. A university that is more interest in asset collection than in the public interest is not a University you want to work for. So, I believe there is no question that ethically the equipment should travel with the PI and an Ethical university would put this in writing. Also, remember that the function of the legal system is not to enforce ethics, nor morality or any of that. It is solely up to individuals and institutions to be ethical. The best time to address these issues is when one accepts a job at any University. You cannot effectively negotiate when you are walking out the door.

...
written by Anonymous, March 18, 2010

I would say the purpose of the government issuing the grant is not for the enrichment of the faculty member either. I think it is a hard case to make that it should always default to the faculty member. There are other issues to think about as well...is the equipment that has been purchased used by other faculty for classroom teaching and research? Has the faculty member acted ethically in their use of the funds? Does the institution or department have a vested interest in a viable lab that continues beyond the faculty members tenure?...

...
written by Anonymous, May 18, 2010

As a PI departing soon for another institution, I discussed these issues with my chair. Generally, all supplies and equipment purchased from grants belong to the university (unless the grant is moved and the items are required to complete the project). However, my chair also tells me that there is a tradition of generosity here, in which the departing PI is often wished well and allowed to take essentially everything (barring furniture and equipment that other department members have come to rely on).

...
written by Anonymous, May 18, 2010

"However, as always, there are more subtle considerations. Say you plan to list a senior colleague as a co-investigator. He FRANKLY IS NOT EXPECTED TO ACTUALLY DO ANYTHING, but his well-known name will be useful, perhaps politically expedient, and you might feel awkward if you left him out. So, there he is â€” in for 5 percent or 10 percent (10 percent of a senior-level salary could run, with fringe, around $25,000)." I am SURPRISED by this statement from a group that I have learned to expect the MOST ethical principles. How can it be ethical to request funding "TO ACTUALLY DO ANYTHING"!!! In addition, the statement assumes that the senior and successful colleague is a male such as in "his well-known name". Just your worst posting so far.

Write comment