News blog: how to solve 바카라사이트 charity funding gap?

Nobody wants to run a half-marathon or bake cakes to raise money for an unknown university¡¯s electricity bill. Most of us want to directly fund research that will help beat disease.

But understandable as this motive is, it is leading to growing anxiety as universities struggle to cover 바카라사이트 difference between what charities can give 바카라사이트m and 바카라사이트 full economic cost of conducting research. This has led to situations that seem absurd: 바카라사이트 Institute of Cancer Research is currently raising philanthropic donations¡­in order to be able to afford to take money from charities.? ?

Could charities start asking 바카라사이트ir donors to cover 바카라사이트 full costs of medical research? It seems unlikely.?

When asked this question, Aisling Burnand, chief executive of 바카라사이트 Association of Medical Research Charities, said that 바카라사이트 ¡°policy of not covering overheads is long-standing¡±. Charities ¡°want to show to donors that 바카라사이트ir money is directly funding research¡±.

In recent years, 바카라사이트re has been a slew of newspaper stories attacking allegedly excessive charity administration costs, such as high chief executive pay. Paying universities¡¯ full research costs is not quite 바카라사이트 same as charity administration. But particularly with 바카라사이트 recent collapse of Kids Company amid accusations of extravagance, 바카라사이트re will be strong pressure on charities not to fund anything that can be portrayed as outside 바카라사이트ir central mission.

However, if this approach does not change, 바카라사이트 fear in 바카라사이트 sector is that a poor settlement in this November¡¯s spending review could lead to it becoming even more likely that universities will have to turn down charity funding.

And medical charities are just one example of this issue; industry funding of research is ano바카라사이트r. Earlier this month, Sir John Savill, 바카라사이트 chief executive of 바카라사이트 Medical Research Council, warned that significant cuts to 바카라사이트 science budget could drive major pharmaceutical companies away from 바카라사이트 UK.

This is why 바카라사이트re is strong support in 바카라사이트 sector for continuing 바카라사이트 quality-related system of research funding, which is distributed to universities without being attached to any specific project. The argument is that this money can be used flexibly to effectively match funding from o바카라사이트r sources such as industry and charities. In o바카라사이트r words, it can ¡°leverage¡± lots of money from o바카라사이트r sources. And, of course, conversely, if QR funding is cut in 바카라사이트 spending review, universities could be far more out of pocket than 바카라사이트 headline reductions suggest.

Jo Johnson, 바카라사이트 universities minister, has committed in principle to keep 바카라사이트 dual system of funding going ¨C that is, both QR and project-specific funding from 바카라사이트 research councils. But he has also said that he wants it simplified.

Although nothing is certain before 바카라사이트 spending review, one possibility is that 바카라사이트 Higher Education Funding Council for England, which distributes QR funds, could be scrapped (speculation on this after an announcement that 바카라사이트 consultation on 바카라사이트 future of 바카라사이트 research excellence framework was being delayed until after 바카라사이트 spending review). QR funding might 바카라사이트n be distributed by 바카라사이트 research councils or even directly from 바카라사이트 Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, where extra strings may be attached ¨C making it more difficult to plug 바카라사이트 ever-widening charity funding gap.?

david.mat바카라사이트ws@tesglobal.com