4 ms·

> UC can hire a college-educated, generally high achieving, generally highly motivated researcher, in California, for $34k/yr That's not exactly how it works.

> UC can hire a college-educated, generally high achieving, generally highly motivated researcher, in California, for $34k/yr That's not exactly how it works. The faculty receives a funding, from a public source such as NSF/NIH, or private source, maybe Google/Facebook, or donation. Roughly 50% of that goes to the the university in lieu of overhead, admin, facilities etc. expense (this should sound an alarm bell to anybody reading). Roughly 25% covers tuition expense- again to the university. The remainder is that $34k you are reading about. So yes, the NIH/NSF will grant more than $100k of the taxpayer money for one student, but the university takes 75% or more of that and peanuts are left for the grad student workers. If someone is in a good place, they might have $1500-2000 take home every month. If a they are in a bad place, it could be lower than $1000 a month. Basically you'd make make less than half of what a fast food worker makes. But without you, grading, research and all other critical higher education activity will stall.

tonfreed 4y ago
It makes you wonder how 50% goes to admin costs. That feels like a lot of overhead
- esalman 4y ago
  In FS2017, the overhead at my department (top 5 ECE program in the US) included the following: - Library 2% - Admin & General 9.4% - Departmental Admin 26.6% - Plant Maintenance 24% - Interest on Financed Bldgs 4.6% - Equipment Depreciation 11.6% - Building & Improv. Depreciation 11.3% - Sponsored Programs Admin & GTRC 8.4% - Student Services 2.1%
- pkaye 4y ago
  I was a student in a CSU (California state university) and a professor nominated me for a award from industry which was valued at $1000. To pass me the check, the university took 20% of the award!
  - metadat 4y ago
    This sounds like very bad behavior, sorry this happened to you. What did the institution claim the justification was? Taking an extra cut from a student, a group who are already generally pretty poor, is peak scumbag.
    - happyjack 4y ago
      It's called indirect cost overhead. Universities take anywhere from 0-100% (yes, you read that 100% right) of money they take in.
      - amluto 4y ago
        It’s not that bad. They take 0-100% overhead on top of money charged to grants. That means they take 0-50% of the money coming in.
        happyjack 4y ago
        I think that's really bad. I've never seen that high of overhead working private sector.
- _gmax0 4y ago
  I'm skeptical of the accuracy of those numbers. I feel like there's oftentimes little accountability in the nebulous academic bureaucracy. An extreme case from earlier this year, in which a university employee was caught stealing: https://www.npr.org/2022/03/29/1089525660/a-former-yale-employee-admits-she-stole-40-million-in-electronics-from-the-unive https://www.npr.org/2022/03/29/1089525660/a-former-yale-empl... How much of this happens on a per-employee basis? What is the expected value of loss if everything is tallied and reconciled?
  - amluto 4y ago
    High end universities regularly mark up most expenses charged to research grants by about 75%. This is the result of negotiations between the university and the government. Nongovernmental grantors will sometimes negotiate much lower overhead. I suspect the negotiation goes “here’s $1M to a prestigious professor, and you may not touch it. We’ll give you $100k to make you feel better. Take it or leave it. By the way, if you leave it, we will happily offer the same research group $1M if they pack their bags and move to a different university.” Wise professors with grants with differing overhead schedules will, of course, allocate charges to minimize the university’s cut.
    - matthewdgreen 4y ago
      If the donation is structured as an unrestricted gift, many universities take <5% as overhead. The nature of such gifts is that they cannot have, well, restrictions. So you can’t ask for deliverables or any other guarantees that might go along with a normal contract.
amluto 4y ago
I think you’re agreeing with me. The university pays the student some absurdly small amount of money. Even ignoring the actual value added by that student, the university collects enough money for doing so that it comes out ahead. Note that this may not be the case for teaching assistants. One can get a teaching assistantship without being attached to any particular grant. This money actually comes from the university (but the university may still charge fees to the student). As a bit of trivia, the NSF GRFP is not a normal grant — it’s a highly prestigious grant directly to a graduate student. And it, at least historically, didn’t put up with this nonsense. GRFP gave the student a stipend and the university a smallish, fixed fee. This fee was well below the normal graduate fees. However, hosting NSF students is considered a privilege, most research groups want them (they’re free from the PI’s perspective), and as a result, the universities simply eat the “loss” and waive the balance of the fees.
thunkshift1 4y ago
How is your comment different than what the parent comment is saying?

tonfreed 4y ago

It makes you wonder how 50% goes to admin costs. That feels like a lot of overhead

esalman 4y ago
In FS2017, the overhead at my department (top 5 ECE program in the US) included the following: - Library 2% - Admin & General 9.4% - Departmental Admin 26.6% - Plant Maintenance 24% - Interest on Financed Bldgs 4.6% - Equipment Depreciation 11.6% - Building & Improv. Depreciation 11.3% - Sponsored Programs Admin & GTRC 8.4% - Student Services 2.1%
pkaye 4y ago
I was a student in a CSU (California state university) and a professor nominated me for a award from industry which was valued at $1000. To pass me the check, the university took 20% of the award!
- metadat 4y ago
  This sounds like very bad behavior, sorry this happened to you. What did the institution claim the justification was? Taking an extra cut from a student, a group who are already generally pretty poor, is peak scumbag.
  - happyjack 4y ago
    It's called indirect cost overhead. Universities take anywhere from 0-100% (yes, you read that 100% right) of money they take in.
    - amluto 4y ago
      It’s not that bad. They take 0-100% overhead on top of money charged to grants. That means they take 0-50% of the money coming in.
      - happyjack 4y ago
        I think that's really bad. I've never seen that high of overhead working private sector.
_gmax0 4y ago
I'm skeptical of the accuracy of those numbers. I feel like there's oftentimes little accountability in the nebulous academic bureaucracy. An extreme case from earlier this year, in which a university employee was caught stealing: https://www.npr.org/2022/03/29/1089525660/a-former-yale-employee-admits-she-stole-40-million-in-electronics-from-the-unive https://www.npr.org/2022/03/29/1089525660/a-former-yale-empl... How much of this happens on a per-employee basis? What is the expected value of loss if everything is tallied and reconciled?
- amluto 4y ago
  High end universities regularly mark up most expenses charged to research grants by about 75%. This is the result of negotiations between the university and the government. Nongovernmental grantors will sometimes negotiate much lower overhead. I suspect the negotiation goes “here’s $1M to a prestigious professor, and you may not touch it. We’ll give you $100k to make you feel better. Take it or leave it. By the way, if you leave it, we will happily offer the same research group $1M if they pack their bags and move to a different university.” Wise professors with grants with differing overhead schedules will, of course, allocate charges to minimize the university’s cut.
  - matthewdgreen 4y ago
    If the donation is structured as an unrestricted gift, many universities take <5% as overhead. The nature of such gifts is that they cannot have, well, restrictions. So you can’t ask for deliverables or any other guarantees that might go along with a normal contract.

amluto 4y ago

I think you’re agreeing with me. The university pays the student some absurdly small amount of money. Even ignoring the actual value added by that student, the university collects enough money for doing so that it comes out ahead. Note that this may not be the case for teaching assistants. One can get a teaching assistantship without being attached to any particular grant. This money actually comes from the university (but the university may still charge fees to the student). As a bit of trivia, the NSF GRFP is not a normal grant — it’s a highly prestigious grant directly to a graduate student. And it, at least historically, didn’t put up with this nonsense. GRFP gave the student a stipend and the university a smallish, fixed fee. This fee was well below the normal graduate fees. However, hosting NSF students is considered a privilege, most research groups want them (they’re free from the PI’s perspective), and as a result, the universities simply eat the “loss” and waive the balance of the fees.

thunkshift1 4y ago

How is your comment different than what the parent comment is saying?