Discussion: View Thread

Upon searching this discussion forum for comments about charging stats-consulting clients for grant preparation, I found several scattered among threads on related topics.  However, I'd value learning more about others' experiences, opinions, and ideas related to whether and how to charge for this pre-grant activity.  I suspect these vary markedly among and within consultants.  To stimulate the discussion I'll mention a few thoughts and ask a couple questions, but please feel free to address aspects I neglect.  For context, I'll note that I'm an independent stats consultant whose clients are mostly academic faculty members with hard-money positions in the social, behavioral, or health sciences.


First, four brief thoughts (I'll avoid the temptation to elaborate):

* T1. I tend to prefer working with clients who pay me from grants -- with occasional exceptions -- so there's incentive to attract and retain such clients.

* T2. There's also incentive to encourage grant-funded clients to involve me in grant preparation: More clients hire me after than before collecting data, so helping shape a study's design and data-analysis plan is a welcome rarity.

* T3. Some clients seem to expect a statistician's contribution to a grant application to be quick and easy (e.g., skim methodological sections for major blunders, "bless" the data-analysis plan, run a few power analyses); that contradicts my usual experience.

* T4. Some clients seem reluctant to pay for help with grant preparation; although I understand that they might not have grant or other institutional funds for this, I suspect they could afford to cover it with personal money.


Now, two questions that may not have simple answers:

* Q1. In what situations might it be sensible to help a client with grant preparation for a fee much lower than one's going rate or even for free, at least for some mutually agreed-upon amount of time?

* Q2. Are there effective ways to avoid being dropped by a client after making considerable grant-preparation contributions for a low fee (or free), such as a contract that's contingent on the grant's being funded?



-------------------------------------------
Adam Hafdahl
Owner & Principal Consultant
ARCH Statistical Consulting, LLC
-------------------------------------------

In similar circumstances, I have simply kept track of the planning or proposal preparation hours and then billed them as part of the final project hours.  There is some risk associated with the project not going forward, but I've generally accepted that (hopefully small) risk.

-------------------------------------------
Michael Morton
-------------------------------------------

We almost never do any work for free or a reduced rate. The ONLY time this would occur is if:
a) It is a cause near and dear to the heart of one of our staff members. For example, one of our senior consultants grew up on the Spirit Lake Dakota Nation, his mother's first language was Dakota. He wanted us to assist in preparation of an American Indian language preservation grant for the Dakota language. We did it for less than 20% of our usual rate.
b) Someone we know is in a real bind. Example: someone's family member died in the middle of writing a proposal. The grant was almost done. We stepped in and finished the proposal for free.

In neither case did I expect to get anything after the fact, even though in both cases they promised to hire us as consultants if they were funded. In the first case, they were funded and did hire us. The second is under review still.

We NEVER do any work on a contingency basis. The people in the university, corporation or other organization we are serving get paid for their work, regardless of whether the proposal is funded or not. So should we. Our company has a good track record of successful grant proposals, but still, there are years when 15% or more do NOT get funded. Whether something is funded or not is affected by a lot of factors, some of which are outside of our control - number of proposals received, quality of competition, amount of funding, agency priorities, etc. etc.

My view might be colored by the fact that we have adequate work and I have to make a payroll every two weeks, both of which make me opposed to doing anything for free.

While I do know people who take contingency work because they are getting started in business and need a track record, or who do contingency work for triple what we charge (since they only get paid if they win), I don't see an incentive for our company to do it.


-------------------------------------------
AnnMaria De Mars
President
The Julia Group
-------------------------------------------

Usually we do charge for proposal preparation at the same rate that we charge after funding. Probably in about a quarter of the cases we do not charge due to the client not having funding for it and we like the project or we just have compassion for someone.

I would like to hear responses to the issue of "bait-and-switch", where the client lists us as the statisticians in the proposal but then drops us or ignores us and uses another statistical resource (usually a "cheaper" and less experienced person, not necessarily a statistician) after the proposal is funded. This has happened with academic clients (about 1 in 5 academic proposals), and we hesitate a little to make noise about it, since the university is a tight-knit community and we don't want to get labeled as hard to work with. "Bait-and-switch" is an unethical practice, but hard to combat. Ideas?

Best wishes,

Nayak



-------------------------------------------
Nayak Polissar
Principal Statistician
The Mountain-Whisper-Light Statistics
-------------------------------------------

Interesting to see the academic perspective on this.  I work in private industry.  We are never paid for time spent on proposals.  It is a cost of doing business.  Sometimes clients do take ideas from our proposals to a cheaper source that they ultimately hire.  We chalk it up to experience.  In a competitive world, we need to differentiate ourselves from our competitors and sell ourselves not just our statistical expertise. Ask why should the buyer choose us instead of the guy down the street?  And start to get to know your customers and your competition.  It's fair to ask our clients who else are they considering and why.  Are we the right person (price range included) for this client's needs?  If not,  try to weed these out before you've invested too much time into the process.

Take a look at this from a different perpesctive.  Suppose you are out looking for a new car.  You go to many dealers, compare make models and prices and ultimately make a choice.  Many of these salesmen have invested quite a bit a time with you and educated you on the various advantages/disadvantages and may have spent a lot of time test drivng with you before you make your decision.  You will only buy from one of them.  What are your decisions going to based on?  Sure price is one thing.  Quality, product value,  warranty, trust and relationship with the dealer, ...   these will all factor in.   Not that I mean we should all consider ourselves car dealers, ...  but we are in a business of selling our statistical services. 

Good luck.

 


-------------------------------------------
Wendy Rotz
-------------------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 11-23-2012 19:13
From: Nayak Polissar
Subject: Charging (or not) for Consultation on Grant Preparation

Usually we do charge for proposal preparation at the same rate that we charge after funding. Probably in about a quarter of the cases we do not charge due to the client not having funding for it and we like the project or we just have compassion for someone.

I would like to hear responses to the issue of "bait-and-switch", where the client lists us as the statisticians in the proposal but then drops us or ignores us and uses another statistical resource (usually a "cheaper" and less experienced person, not necessarily a statistician) after the proposal is funded. This has happened with academic clients (about 1 in 5 academic proposals), and we hesitate a little to make noise about it, since the university is a tight-knit community and we don't want to get labeled as hard to work with. "Bait-and-switch" is an unethical practice, but hard to combat. Ideas?

Best wishes,

Nayak



-------------------------------------------
Nayak Polissar
Principal Statistician
The Mountain-Whisper-Light Statistics
-------------------------------------------

The professional statistician as "car salesman?"  Unfortunately, too many investigators see us that way. 


In academic biostatistics, I prefer to compare us to healthcare providers.


Medical problems often first present themselves with patients complaining of symptoms that they are not be able to concretely describe and they rarely understand. The work-up begins with a history and physical, but will typically go way beyond that. Once the diagnostic work is done, there should be clear treatment options. This all must be modern and thorough. All of work is billable.


In statistical planning for grant development, the investigator usually first comes to us with a less-than-concrete research question and a rough study design. We do a "history and physical" of the proposed study, "diagnose" its statistical considerations, and then develop a customized "treatment" plan, which must be delineated and justified in writing in a way that both statisticians and non-statisticians can appreciate in a most positive manner. There might be analyses of preliminary data and/or extensive computations involved in justifying the sample size, etc. This can take 5 hours, 50 hours, or much more. All of this is billable, too.


Just as medical institutions provide substantial amounts of "free" or "discounted" medical care by excusing all of part of some patients' bills on a case-by-case basis, so can statistics units make various deals on grant preparations. But I've learned the hard way not to make "grant development" work free to all investigators.


Some attorneys may meet with you initially for free, but, unless they take you on as  "pro bono" case, they not work further for free.


An architect may meet with you initially for free, but if you want a complete houseplan, be prepared to pay for it.


Likewise, many statistics units offer "walk-in clinics" where investigators can get one-on-one "re-active" consulting advice, including having an initial discussion about a grant proposal.  But "actual" work is billed.


And back to the car dealer analogy... Most of them charge a flat fee for diagnostic work only. My little shop has to pay $10,000/year just for the software that runs the diagnostic unit that they plug in to see why the "Check Engine Soon" light went on. And the two guys who own the place are each as smart as the vast majority of investigators I deal with, and each has 25+ years of diagnostic experience. This all has real value to me, and real value should be billable.   


Material I really like is: http://biostat.mc.vanderbilt.edu/wiki/Main/Info4Investigators#Policies_and_Procedures_for_Gran

Wendy, one major difference is that car salespeople do not in my experience spend that much time on any one (potential) customer.   The other difference is that if this work is substantial in comparison to the total work on the
grant, then when another consultant uses you proposal they are able to underbid you, because there's a chunk of
work which they got for free.

-------------------------------------------
Barry DeCicco
Statistician
University of Michigan Health System
-------------------------------------------





-------------------------------------------

Take a look at this from a different perpesctive.  Suppose you are out looking for a new car.  You go to many dealers, compare make models and prices and ultimately make a choice.  Many of these salesmen have invested quite a bit a time with you and educated you on the various advantages/disadvantages and may have spent a lot of time test drivng with you before you make your decision.  You will only buy from one of them.  What are your decisions going to based on?  Sure price is one thing.  Quality, product value,  warranty, trust and relationship with the dealer, ...   these will all factor in.   Not that I mean we should all consider ourselves car dealers, ...  but we are in a business of selling our statistical services. 

Good luck.

 


-------------------------------------------
Wendy Rotz
-------------------------------------------

Having worked on both the industry and academic side I think the word proposal means different things. The original poster is referring to writing a proposal for a client, not to a client. So if a group of researchers is writing a grant proposal to NIH and calls you in to write methods and evaluation I think that is typically billable. However, if a person is writing a scope of work or proposal to a company or organization for the work they would do for them, that is analogous to a car salesman and one would not bill for that. So if I write a scope of work to an industrial client I would not charge. ------------------------------------------- Laura Kapitula Assistant Professor Grand Valley State University -------------------------------------------
Original Message: Sent: 11-27-2012 11:04 From: Barry DeCicco Subject: Charging (or not) for Consultation on Grant Preparation Wendy, one major difference is that car salespeople do not in my experience spend that much time on any one (potential) customer. The other difference is that if this work is substantial in comparison to the total work on the grant, then when another consultant uses you proposal they are able to underbid you, because there's a chunk of work which they got for free. ------------------------------------------- Barry DeCicco Statistician University of Michigan Health System ------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- Take a look at this from a different perpesctive. Suppose you are out looking for a new car. You go to many dealers, compare make models and prices and ultimately make a choice. Many of these salesmen have invested quite a bit a time with you and educated you on the various advantages/disadvantages and may have spent a lot of time test drivng with you before you make your decision. You will only buy from one of them. What are your decisions going to based on? Sure price is one thing. Quality, product value, warranty, trust and relationship with the dealer, ... these will all factor in. Not that I mean we should all consider ourselves car dealers, ... but we are in a business of selling our statistical services. Good luck. ------------------------------------------- Wendy Rotz -------------------------------------------

Interesting. I had not thought of it in that sense. In that case, when we write a proposal TO a client, as in, a scope of work, no, we do not charge. We also offer the first hour of consulting free. Since most of our contracts end up to be well over 150 hours, that isn't a big deal. After an hour, we have a good idea if we want to work together, the client needs and a reasonable cost. We put it in writing as a proposed contract and go from there.

-------------------------------------------
AnnMaria De Mars
President
The Julia Group
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-27-2012 13:45
From: Laura Kapitula
Subject: Charging (or not) for Consultation on Grant Preparation


Having worked on both the industry and academic side I think the word proposal means different things. The original poster is referring to writing a proposal for a client, not to a client. So if a group of researchers is writing a grant proposal to NIH and calls you in to write methods and evaluation I think that is typically billable.

However, if a person is writing a scope of work or proposal to a company or organization for the work they would do for them, that is analogous to a car salesman and one would not bill for that. So if I write a scope of work to an industrial client I would not charge.


-------------------------------------------
Laura Kapitula
Assistant Professor
Grand Valley State University
-------------------------------------------

My own experience and interpretation is similar to Laura's.  There's a distinction between being called in as an advisor for (another) team's proposal writing, versus being in the team writing the proposal.   (Now that I'm in academia, it's often preferable, instead of dollar payment, to actually join the team writing the proposal--which removes the above distinction.)

-------------------------------------------
William Goodman
University of Ontario Institute of Technology
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-27-2012 13:45
From: Laura Kapitula
Subject: Charging (or not) for Consultation on Grant Preparation


Having worked on both the industry and academic side I think the word proposal means different things. The original poster is referring to writing a proposal for a client, not to a client. So if a group of researchers is writing a grant proposal to NIH and calls you in to write methods and evaluation I think that is typically billable.

However, if a person is writing a scope of work or proposal to a company or organization for the work they would do for them, that is analogous to a car salesman and one would not bill for that. So if I write a scope of work to an industrial client I would not charge.


-------------------------------------------
Laura Kapitula
Assistant Professor
Grand Valley State University
-------------------------------------------

These later postings frame the question sharply.

When I directed a large consulting/collaboration unit at a "major medical center," we would meet with a prospective investigator at no charge to get a quick "history and physical" of the project and if things went well, would quote an ESTIMATE for charges for the work as CURRENTLY envisioned and agreed to. The "new project" form we used and words we were supposed to vocalize were to make sure that the investigator (usually an MD) understood that if the project required greater statistical efforts than currently foreseen (as most do), then a new ESTIMATE would be provided, IF REQUESTED.

The vast majority of our investigators trusted us, never requested a second estimate, and saw to it that the bills were paid. A small percentage needed/wanted firm quotes for each morsel of work. This was a bit annoying, but nevertheless tolerable.

However, there's always an outlier, right? We had one department chair (out of >50) who required that each new project be firmly quoted in full. and he gave us explicit instructions that we stop working on any project that exceeded its quote. So that's what we did! The members of that department loathed this policy, but they put the blame where it belonged--on their own chair, not us. Not surprisingly, this was only one of many such policies that caused friction between this particular chair and the members of his department. I would learn in time that this man's reputation for orneriness was legendary far and wide.

-------------------------------------------
Ralph O'Brien
Case Western Reserve University
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-28-2012 09:02
From: William Goodman
Subject: Charging (or not) for Consultation on Grant Preparation

My own experience and interpretation is similar to Laura's.  There's a distinction between being called in as an advisor for (another) team's proposal writing, versus being in the team writing the proposal.   (Now that I'm in academia, it's often preferable, instead of dollar payment, to actually join the team writing the proposal--which removes the above distinction.)

-------------------------------------------
William Goodman
University of Ontario Institute of Technology
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-27-2012 13:45
From: Laura Kapitula
Subject: Charging (or not) for Consultation on Grant Preparation


Having worked on both the industry and academic side I think the word proposal means different things. The original poster is referring to writing a proposal for a client, not to a client. So if a group of researchers is writing a grant proposal to NIH and calls you in to write methods and evaluation I think that is typically billable.

However, if a person is writing a scope of work or proposal to a company or organization for the work they would do for them, that is analogous to a car salesman and one would not bill for that. So if I write a scope of work to an industrial client I would not charge.


-------------------------------------------
Laura Kapitula
Assistant Professor
Grand Valley State University
-------------------------------------------

Had a related question to this thread for those on the list in academia. In some sense, I would say I never technically help with grant preparation for free, it's just that this effort is usually covered through some institutional mechanism. Due to the current financial climate, all cores at Wake Forest (the biostats consulting service being viewed as a core), are being funneled through a competitive application process for continued funding. As part of putting this application together, I've been curious what other consulting centers have garnered in terms of institutional support (in terms of dollars or FTE) for activities that are usually difficult to bill to a grant etc. I realize in some places this support will come from a CTSA award, but I'm mostly interested in what is happening at places that don't have such awards (but I'll take any info I can get). Simply put, I have a hunch what we're are budgeting to assist with grant preparation, etc. is rather modest, but don't really have any data to support this assumption. So if anybody would be willing to share just some general information about what level of support they currently get from their institution, I'd be greatly appreciative. Feel free to email me directly at npajewsk@wakehealth.edu  

-------------------------------------------
Nicholas Pajewski
Assistant Professor
Wake Forest University School of Medicine
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-26-2012 10:15
From: Wendy Rotz
Subject: Charging (or not) for Consultation on Grant Preparation

Interesting to see the academic perspective on this.  I work in private industry.  We are never paid for time spent on proposals.  It is a cost of doing business.  Sometimes clients do take ideas from our proposals to a cheaper source that they ultimately hire.  We chalk it up to experience.  In a competitive world, we need to differentiate ourselves from our competitors and sell ourselves not just our statistical expertise. Ask why should the buyer choose us instead of the guy down the street?  And start to get to know your customers and your competition.  It's fair to ask our clients who else are they considering and why.  Are we the right person (price range included) for this client's needs?  If not,  try to weed these out before you've invested too much time into the process.

Take a look at this from a different perpesctive.  Suppose you are out looking for a new car.  You go to many dealers, compare make models and prices and ultimately make a choice.  Many of these salesmen have invested quite a bit a time with you and educated you on the various advantages/disadvantages and may have spent a lot of time test drivng with you before you make your decision.  You will only buy from one of them.  What are your decisions going to based on?  Sure price is one thing.  Quality, product value,  warranty, trust and relationship with the dealer, ...   these will all factor in.   Not that I mean we should all consider ourselves car dealers, ...  but we are in a business of selling our statistical services. 

Good luck.

 


-------------------------------------------
Wendy Rotz
-------------------------------------------