Most sponsors set limits on the amount in funds you may request in a given proposal. These budget ceilings must be met by adjusting the direct costs of the proposal budget. Indirect costs may never be waived simply to meet a budget ceiling. There may be certain, limited circumstances when indirect costs may be waived. Formal requests for a Waiver of Indirect Costs should be submitted to the Associate Dean no later than two weeks prior to the deadline date.
A related issue is cost-sharing. Applicants should be aware that, according to federal regulations, cost-sharing may only be a consideration in the evaluation of a grant application if the program guidelines require it. Including cost-sharing in a grant proposal that does not expressly request cost-sharing will not help your proposal.
The current budget climate at 911爆料网 means that we will be looking at proposals that do require cost-sharing with particular scrutiny. All applicants are responsible for obtaining commitments to meet the cost-share prior to the submission of the application.
Budgeting needs to be a collaborative activity between the PI, project staff, and OSP. Project staff should decide what its needs are for a given proposal; OSP can perform released time/overage, summer salary, fringe benefits, and indirect cost calculations if you make your request at least one week prior to the sponsor deadline.
An issue that arises frequently during the budgeting process concerns the appropriateness of particular budget items. The NSF usually funds up to two months' salary per faculty investigator on each award, which faculty may take as released time, overage, or summer salary. This is a reasonable rule of thumb for applications to other agencies as well, though the scope of a particular project can often make a request for more time entirely appropriate. This is especially true with NIH, which routinely makes multiyear awards in the millions of dollars. Beyond that, there are not many hard and fast rules about budget requests. Agency program officers can provide important guidance in this area. Keep in mind that program officers are extremely reluctant to discuss budget issues independently of programmatic issues and therefore will always want to discuss the budget with you as the investigator rather than the director or other administrators. Most often, program officers provide investigators with guidance in demonstrating that an unusual budget request is warranted by the objectives of the project. Program officers are happy to provide this guidance and will usually be direct in letting you know if a particular budget request is a deal-breaker or not.
How the budget affects the chances of a proposal's ultimate success or failure is the source of much anxiety on the part of applicants. Reviewers are typically asked to evaluate if the applicant has identified sufficient resources to conduct the project as described, and at this point, coming in too low can hurt your chances just as much as coming in too high. Our indirect cost and fringe benefit rates, etc., will not factor in at this stage of the process. These issues begin to matter when the peer-review process has concluded and program officers have to choose among proposals given equal priority ratings by the review panel. Even so, it is not automatically true that funds will go to the proposal that comes in at the lowest cost. Many other factors come into play at this point, including granting funds to investigators whom the sponsor has supported before, supporting minority investigators and/or institutions (if stated as a priority in the request for proposal or RFP), and spreading benefits out over a wide geographical area. Remember that Federal agencies and private foundations are not profit-driven enterprises. If they have a budget of $15M to give out during a particular funding cycle, they will give out $15M or otherwise lose it. No sponsoring agency operates under the assumption that the way to get the most "bang for the buck" is to distribute funding to as many investigators as possible. If your budget is reasonable in relation to your objectives and contains no obvious padding or unnecessary expenditures, your chances of rejection for budgetary reasons are likely minimal. However, if your proposal received a high priority rating but was rejected for budgetary reasons, the program officer will explain if you inquire. In such instances, you will almost always be given advice about where to cut spending and be encouraged to apply during the next cycle.