On Fri, 30 May 1997 11:27:25 +0100, FOLLO@mm11.ukl.uni-freiburg.de wrote: >I am in the process of getting a core facility up and running and >have run into something of a brick wall, namely our administration. >[...] >Our goal is to be self-supporting so we would like to get reimbursed >for reagents, maintenance/repairs, etc. We aren't talking massive >profits here, simply covering our costs and at the same time being >able to help out those outside users as well. >[...] >P.S. You haven't experienced true bureaucracy until you've >experienced German Bureaucracy (I hadn't anyway). Don't concur with your last statement. There *is* a brick wall in your case - but *not* with the administration. They are actually quite flexible to deal with (maybe not at the lowly clerk level, though). You may *easily* open an account with the university administration and use this for anything [like paying salaries, charging users etc] you like - provided you [or your department's head] serve as underwriter as well. OK, this is one of the basics - this business is *your* responsibility. There is an obvious conflict with charging users outside the university as there is no such thing as "overhead costs" in Germany. Again, this problem has already been solved for many contract studies in the medical field and the administration generally charges from 10-20% of the overall costs. This is negoatiable and such rates can be applied to any of your outside users and simply added to the invoice. With very few exceptions, there are no such charges invoiced to academic customers. So where's the problem? Maybe at attracting enough users to become self-sufficient? Charging users at rates that actually *cover* the cost? What about the brick wall being in the heads of the departments' heads? Those simply being *unwilling* to share resources? As long as flow cytometers *do* serve as prestigious objects of academic self-esteem, no German (but not necessarily restricted Germans only <g>) [C4] professor will send samples to a core facility and even *pay* for such service, if he can have *his* own machine somewhere down in the lab and guide *his* visitors to *his* FACS lab. Cost is a miniscule issue compared to prestige! I could name quite a few individuals who approached me with something like "we have applied for our own flow cytometer and we expect you to respond with 'we're fully booked' when approached for comment" even if the opposite was true. The rates you're going to charge are a problem on their own - because none of your prospective users wants to realize *& pay* the actual costs (even if they run their own machine and thus should have some insight). Since it's easier to get your own flow cytometer from the DFG than asking for project related money to outsource those duties, you may experience a hard time. And no one at the DFG (which in fact represents the creme-de-la-creme of our scientists) truly supports the establishment of such core facilities. As a consequence, no money to outsource flow duties is being applied for in most grants and hence not available to pay for such service (only solution being to apply for one's own machine <eg>). To top that, I recall a representative from company "X" telling me (when I was negotiating for someone else) "as a representative of X, I'd love to sell you our machine - but as a taxpayer in this country, knowing about the sad state of finances, I am appalled to learn that your institution maintains two virtually unused sorters which could be upgraded to the state of art at a fraction of the cost" Bureaucracy ??? [I doubt it] Martin R. Hadam Kinderklinik - Medizinische Hochschule D-30623 Hannover Germany Email: Hadam.Martin@MH-Hannover.de Martin R. Hadam Kinderklinik - Medizinische Hochschule D-30623 Hannover Germany Email: Hadam.Martin@MH-Hannover.de Martin R. Hadam Kinderklinik - Medizinische Hochschule D-30623 Hannover Germany Email: Hadam.Martin@MH-Hannover.de Martin R. Hadam Kinderklinik - Medizinische Hochschule D-30623 Hannover Germany Email: Hadam.Martin@MH-Hannover.de
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 03 2002 - 11:49:48 EST