Early in the second Trump Administration, the federal government instituted a uniform 15 percent cap on indirect cost rates in government-funded research (including insights work). A group of experts are developing new models for funding indirect costs, and the Insights Association seeks member feedback on it.
Starting in February, 2025, first at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and then at other agencies, the federal government capped allowable indirect cost rates in federally-funded research at 15 percent across the board, replacing widely-variable previously-negotiated rates, which often ranged from 30 to 60 percent or even more. Many entities have cut salaries and positions in response to the reduction in indirect cost rates.
Indirect costs are overhead intended to cover expenses that support research activities, but cannot be directly attributed to a specific project, such as facility maintenance, utilities, administrative support, and compliance with federal regulations. The rules for indirect costs are set out in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR).
A group of academic, medical, and independent research institutions formed the Joint Association Group in April, gathering experts to develop “a more efficient and transparent model for funding indirect costs on federal research grants.” The goal is to offer “the Federal government a new model, developed with full engagement of the research community.”
Now, the group is “soliciting feedback on the provisional models it has developed from which it plans to synthesize a final model to present to Congress and the executive branch.” According to the group, the provisional models “create an auditable and transparent process for covering essential research costs” and “offer acceptable and reasonable approaches to fairly account for the essential costs required to conduct federally funded research.”
The group is sharing full details on the possible models, including links to presentations and slide decks, testing guides, workbooks, etc., and intends to make a decision in the next couple of weeks.
The Insights Association encourages members involved in federally-funded insights work to share their feedback ASAP with IA so we may consider the insights industry’s position.
About the Author
Based in Washington, DC, Howard is the Insights Association's lobbyist for the marketing research and data analytics industry, focusing primarily on consumer privacy and data security, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), tort reform, and the funding and integrity of the decennial Census and the American Community Survey (ACS).
Howard has more than two decades of public policy experience. Before the Insights Association, he worked in Congress as senior legislative staffer for then-Representatives Christopher Cox (CA-48) and Cliff Stearns (FL-06). He also served more than four years with a science policy think tank, working to improve the understanding of scientific and social research and methodology among journalists and policymakers.
Howard is also co-director of The Census Project, a 900+ member coalition in support of a fair and accurate Census and ACS.
He has also served previously on the Board of Directors for the National Institute for Lobbying and Ethics and and the Association of Government Relations Professionals.
Howard has an MA International Relations from the University of Essex in England and a BA Honors Political Studies from Trent University in Canada, and has obtained the Certified Association Executive (CAE), Professional Lobbying Certificate (PLC) and the Public Policy Certificate (PPC).
When not running advocacy for the Insights Association, Howard enjoys hockey, NFL football, sci-fi and horror movies, playing with his dog, and spending time with family and friends.