| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 67
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
APPENDIX C
Animal Resources Survey-1999 and Survey Tables
INTRODUCTION
This appendix contains the questionnaire that was sent to 130 animal care and use programs throughout the United States. The Committee on Cost of and Payment for Animal Research reviewed the questionnaire and suggested some enhancements that were incorporated into the survey by Yale Section of Comparative Medicine personnel before it was distributed. There were 63 responses for a nearly 50% response rate. The focus of the Cost Committee was to suggest methods for cost containment in traditional biomedical animal research facilities. Judging from the numbers and types of species used, some of the respondents to the survey appeared to be primarily in agricultural research or aquaculture. Therefore, the decision was made to restrict analysis to the 53 institutions that had an average daily mouse census of 1,000 or more. The 53 institutions were divided into three groups according to average daily mouse census: group 1 (n = 23) 1,000-9,999, group 2 (n = 16) 10,000-29,999, and group 3 (n = 14) > 29,999.
OCR for page 68
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
Group
Mouse average daily census
Institution ID numbers
No. institutions
1
1,000-9,999
4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 17, 18, 20, 24, 28, 29, 34, 37, 39, 45, 46, 49, 53, 56, 57, 58, 59
23
2
10,000-29,999
11, 14, 19, 23, 25, 27, 36, 41, 42, 43, 44, 47, 54, 55, 60, 62
16
3
> 29,999
1, 3, 7, 10, 16, 21, 31, 35, 40, 48, 51, 52, 61, 63
14
The responses to the questionnaire are summarized in the ensuing tables. Nearly all tables have 1 row for each group and a final row for all 53 institutions. Where necessary, a description (in parentheses) of what the numbers in the table represent (mean number of institutions, mean percentage of the group or of all 53 institutions, and so on) is provided.
OCR for page 69
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
Animal Resources Survey – 1999
Table of Contents
Page
Identification page .................................................................................................1
I Physical plant ................................................................................................................2
II Staffing ..........................................................................................................................6
III Animal procurement and census ..........................................................................12
IV Services..........................................................................................................................13
V Prevalence of infectious agents ..............................................................................18
VI Finances .....................................................................................................................19
VII Regulatory issues ....................................................................................................27
VII Regulatory issues ....................................................................................................27
VIII Resource–client relationships .............................................................................28
IX Future directions .......................................................................................................29
General Instructions
Please use black ink.
Please write legibly.
Please answer all questions.
Please do not add explanatory notes to your answers unless they are requested.
If you are unsure about the accuracy of a proposed answer (eg, institutional financial data), please ask an appropriate colleague at your institution for help.
If you are unsure about the intent of a question or how to answer a question, send your query by e–mail to: valeria.krizsan@yale.edu . We will try to help.
Please do not separate questionnaire pages. If you must do so, please restaple them securely before you return the questionnaire.
Please remember to enclose with the completed questionnaire your:
organizational chart
list of per diem rates
financial contribution
Please return the completed questionnaire by MARCH 15, 1999.
OCR for page 70
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
OCR for page 71
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
1. Physical Plant:
A. Configuration:
Which configuration describes most accurately the layout of your resource:
1. Fully centralized: (all sites contiguous (under “one roof”))
___
2. Partially centralized: (one dominant site and one or more regional sites)
___
3. De–centralized: (multiple regional sites of approximately equal size)
___
4. Total number of sites
___
Is your institution pursuing centralization or consolidation of animal resources to improve operating efficiency? (Circle one)
Y N
B. Space allocation for full physical plant:
No.
Ft2
1. Animal rooms
____
____
2. Procedure rooms
____
____
3. Washing centers (including autoclaves, etc)
____
____
4. Food and bedding storage rooms
____
____
5. Laboratory animal medicine exam/treatment rooms
____
____
6. Operating rooms
____
____
7. Diagnostic laboratory rooms (path + micro + etc)
____
____
8. Administrative and faculty offices, library, etc
____
____
9. All other rooms
____
____
10. Corridors
******
____
TOTALS
____
____
OCR for page 72
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
Percent of total space available for animal housing
(Animal room ft2 divided by total ft2)
____
C. Security:
C1. Physical Security:
Number of sites from A4 protected by:
electronics (eg card reader)
____
keys
____
electronics and keys
____
C2. Environmental security:
Number of animal rooms from B1 protected by:
automated environmental monitoring or controls
____
emergency power
____
D. Characteristics of individual sites:
The size ranges in the following table are given in gross square feet (gsf). Your responses should indicate the total number of sites, rooms and machines per size range. Example: 3 sites at 5,000 gsf x 20 animal rooms/site = enter 3 under No. sites and 60 under No. animal rooms.
Size of site (gsf)
0–5,000
5,001–10,000
10,001–20,000
> 20,000
Total
No. sites
No. animal rooms
No. washing centers
No. tunnel washers
No. rack washers
No. autoclaves
No. procedure rooms
OCR for page 73
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
F. Housing for MICE:
F1. Current housing conditions
Data in the following table represent conditions for the following period: Month____Yr____
Housing or husbandry condition
No. cages (avg daily census)
No. mice (avg daily census)
Conventional cages (no bonnets) with water bottles
Conventional cages with autowater
Microisolation cages with water bottles
Microisolation cages with autowater
Individually ventilated cages with water bottles
Individually ventilated cages with autowater
Total mouse cages
***********
Total mice
***************
Total ft2 assigned to housing of mice_______
Mice/ft2 of mouse housing space_______
E2. Recent or planned additions to housing for MICE
Status
Completed since 1993
Under discussion
Designed
Under construction
Completion due (year)
Census capacity
Gross ft2
Use of individually ventilated racks (1 = high, 2 = moderate, 3 = low, 4 = none)
Washing center? (Y or N)
OCR for page 74
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
F. Facilities for animal health services:
(If some rooms identified in the following table are multi–purpose (eg bacteriology and serology) please enter the combination of uses and relevant square footage in the space provided under “Combined use”).
Function
No. of rooms
Total ft2
Examinations/ minor procedures
Surgery (sterile)
Post–operative recovery
Diagnostic imaging
Intensive care
Pharmacy
Necropsy
Histotechnology
Bacteriology/parasitology
Serology
Virology
Clinical chemistry
Combined use:
(Should equal totals obtained by summating I.B.6–8) Totals
Section II, beginning on the next page, focuses on staffing. In addition to your responses, please enclose an organizational chart that includes the institutional official(s) to whom the resource director reports.
OCR for page 75
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
II. Staffing
The position titles used in Section II may not correspond exactly to those used by your resource.
Generic terminology has been used in this survey to help you make comparable choices.
A. Administrative staff:
Full–time equivalents is abbreviated in this and all subsequent queries as FTEs.
Example: If you have two assistant directors and each devotes 50% effort, enter 2 in the “number of persons” column and 1.0 in the “FTEs” column).
Position
Number of persons
FTEs
Degree(s) of current occupants DVM PhD MBA Other
1. Director
2. Assoc/assist director
3. Business manager
4. Informatics specialist
5. Purchasing agent
6. Regulatory compliance officer
Total managerial staff (1–6)
****************************
****************************
Total clerical staff
****************************
B. Animal care staff:
B1. Composition of animal care staff
Position
Number of persons
FTEs
Number with AALAS certification – (specify levels)
1. Senior manager for animal care
2. Assistant manager for animal care
OCR for page 76
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
3. Regional supervisor for animal care
4. Training coordinator
Total manager/supervisor staff (1–4)
***********************
***********************
5. Animal technologist
6. Animal technician
7. Assistant animal technician
Total technical staff (5–7)
***********************
B2. Configuration of animal care staff
Enter the number which most closely indicates the configuration of your staff.
1 = all
2 = majority
3 = minority
4 = none
Internal (institutional employees)
___
External (eg outsourced to a commercial firm)
___
Unionized (technicians)
___
Centralized (technicians report directly to senior supervisor/manager(s))
___
Regional (regional staffs are led by supervisor who reports to a senior supervisor/manager).
___
Other configuration ______________________________________________________________________
B3. Criteria for determining animal care staffing levels
Quantified time–effort reporting
___
Qualitative assessments by animal care supervisors
___
Other______________________________________________________________________
___
OCR for page 77
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
B4. Wages and benefits for animal care staff
Standard work week (hours)
___
Starting hourly wage for an entry level technician (animal care/sanitation)
___
Current average annual salary for the animal technician staff
___
Current fringe benefit rate (in %) for an animal care technician's salary
___
Annual benefit days for a technician with 5 years of service:
Vacation days
___
Sick days
___
Paid holidays
___
Other recess days
___
Personal days
___
Total annual benefit days
__
B5. Recruitment of animal care staff
Rank the following factors for their impact on limiting your resource's ability to recruit
(Table A) and retain (Table B) new staff:
(1 = high, 2 = moderate, 3 = low, 4 = none)
TABLE A
Recruitment factor
Manager/ Supervisor
Technician
Starting salary
Earning potential
Benefits
Training and experience
Job responsibilities
Career opportunities
OCR for page 134
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
Please enclose a copy of your institution's per diem rates for FY98–99 (Tables 20c – d)
Table 20c. Finances: Formulation of per diem rates: Current per diem rates ($)
Mouse
Mouse basic
Mouse full
Rat
Rat basic
Rat full
Per mouse
Per cage
Per mouse
Per cage
Per mouse
Per cage
Per rat
Per cage
Per rat
Per cage
Per rat
Per cage
Group 1
0.20
0.55
0.16
0.46
0.31
0.91
0.46
0.94
0.33
0.69
0.77
1.50
Group 2
023
0.53
0.55
0.54
1.48
0.88
0.38
0.98
0.77
0.80
0.93
1.27
Group 3
0.29
0.42
0.46
0.67
0.62
1.07
0.89
1.25
0.81
All
0.22
0.50
0.24
0.50
0.55
0.81
0.49
0.98
0.51
0.81
0.99
1.25
Table 20d. Finances: Formulation of per diem rates: Current per diem rates ($)(continued)
Hamster
G Pig
Rabbit
Ferret
Cat
Dog
Primate
Primate small
Primate large
Sheep
Pig
Frog
Per animal
Per cage
Per animal
Per cage
Group 1
0.50
0.85
1.10
1.67
2.40
2.97
4.39
9.89
7.18
5.00
9.63
11.10
11.11
1.88
Group 2
0.38
0.98
0.96
1.44
1.86
2.58
4.93
7.30
6.19
3.55
8.69
11.02
9.79
0.89
Group 3
0.46
1.20
0.99
1.38
1.89
2.85
4.50
8.45
7.89
4.88
8.34
9.09
8.86
0.97
All
0.46
1.01
1.03
1.52
2.11
2.83
4.57
8.82
6.97
4.63
8.65
10.31
10.16
1.31
Survey Tables – Page 33
OCR for page 135
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
VI. D. Extramural funding
Please indicate the total current extramural funding for biomedical research and training for the components of your institution.
Table 21a. Finances: Extramural funding; All types of research and training (in millions of dollars, mean)
Direct
Indirect
NIH
Other federal
All other
Subtotal
NIH
Other federal
All other
Subtotal
Total
Group 1
39.4
17.8
28.7
82.1
11.2
1.9
2.9
18.6
100.3
Group 2
86.9
29.2
40.6
152.4
39.6
5.5
6.9
50.2
196.3
Group 3
97.2
23.3
46.8
150.2
48.2
8.3
15.6
69.7
213.6
All
70.5
23.3
37.0
123.7
30.9
4.8
7.5
42.4
160.8
Table 21b. Finances: Extramural funding: Animal–related research and training (in millions of dollars, mean)
Direct
Indirect
NIH
Other federal
All other
Subtotal
NIH
Other federal
All other
Subtotal
Total
Group 1
12.6
3.9
5.1
20.5
4.9
0.7
0.5
7.6
33.7
Group 2
41.4
4.5
6.3
54.0
19.7
0.5
1.0
20.9
72.1
Group 3
48.6
4.9
9.4
60.2
22.4
1.8
1.8
25.6
81.2
All
33.1
4.4
6.7
43.4
14.9
0.9
1.0
17.2
59.9
Survey Tables – Page 34
OCR for page 136
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
VI. E. Operating budget
VI. E. 1. Expense categories
Indicate which of the following categories of expense are typically included in the DIRECT operating budget for your animal resources, irrespedctive of the source(s) of off-setting revenues (Tables 22a – c)
Table 22a. Finances: Operating budget: Expense categories in DIRECT operating budget (number of institutions)*
Animal purchases
Salaries: director, managers/ supervisors
Salaries: veterinarians & related
Wages: technical staff
Animal care supplies
Personnel supplies
Safety supplies, equipment
Rodent caging
Rating
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
Group 1
16
2
5
9
11
3
10
10
3
17
4
2
21
1
1
21
1
1
19
3
1
20
2
1
Group 2
8
1
5
12
4
0
12
4
0
15
1
0
16
0
0
15
0
0
16
0
0
15
1
0
Group 3
10
2
2
6
8
0
8
6
0
13
1
0
14
0
0
14
0
0
14
0
0
13
1
0
All
34
5
12
27
23
3
30
20
3
45
6
2
51
1
1
50
1
1
49
3
1
48
4
1
* 1 = fully included; 2 = partially included; 3 = not included.
Table 22b. Finances: Operating budget: Expense categories in DIRECT operating budget (continued) (number of institutions)*
Water bottles
NHP caging
Transportation services
Informatics services/supplies
Computer purchases
Capital equipment
Fixed equipment contracts
Movable equipment contracts
Rating
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
Group 1
21
1
1
10
2
7
16
4
2
14
6
3
16
5
2
9
8
6
15
6
2
15
6
2
Group 2
16
0
0
9
2
1
14
0
1
15
1
0
14
2
0
7
3
5
15
0
1
16
0
0
Group 3
13
1
0
6
4
2
12
1
1
9
5
0
9
5
0
2
11
1
12
1
1
12
2
0
All
50
2
1
25
8
10
42
5
4
38
12
3
39
12
2
18
22
12
42
7
4
43
8
2
* 1 = fully included; 2 = partially included; 3 = not included.
Table 22c. Finances: Operating budget: Expense categories in DIRECT operating budget (continued) (number of institutions)*
Pharmaceuticals
Serological/ microbiological monitoring
Staff training
Travel
Facilities maintenance
Energy costs
Regulatory license accreditation
IACUC costs
Rating
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
Group 1
19
4
0
21
1
1
19
4
0
17
3
3
6
13
4
4
1
18
14
5
4
3
5
15
Group 2
14
0
1
14
2
0
14
2
0
14
2
0
9
4
2
1
1
13
13
2
1
3
4
9
Group 3
13
1
0
11
3
0
10
4
0
10
4
0
2
9
3
0
0
14
9
2
3
3
2
9
All
46
5
1
46
6
1
43
10
0
41
9
3
17
26
9
5
1
45
36
9
8
9
11
33
* 1 = fully included; 2 = partially included; 3 = not included.
Survey Tables – Page 35
OCR for page 137
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
VI. E. 2. Salary sources
Please indicate the current salary sources (as percent) for staff for each of the categories listed. If a staff position has more than one member, indicate the total percent under each column for all individuals in the position (Tables 23a – g)
Table 23a. Finances: Operating budget: Salary sources (%)
Director
Associate/assistant director
Per diem revenue
Inst. funds
Fees for service
Research funds
Per diem revenue
Inst. funds
Fees for service
Research funds
Group 1
18
78
2
2
24
69
0
6
Group 2
31
62
0
7
53
40
0
7
Group 3
36
54
0
9
48
44
3
5
All
27
67
1
5
40
53
1
6
Table 23b. Finances: Operating budget: Salary sources (%)(continued)
Clinical veterinarian
Pathologist
Per diem revenue
Inst. funds
Fees for service
Research funds
Per diem revenue
Inst. funds
Fees for service
Research funds
Group 1
27
72
1
0
16
72
3
9
Group 2
56
39
3
2
25
54
0
21
Group 3
60
32
3
4
39
42
1
18
All
46
50
2
2
28
55
1
16
Table 23c. Finances: Operating budget: Salary sources (%)(continued)
Microbiologist
Virologist
Per diem revenue
Inst. funds
Fees for service
Research funds
Per diem revenue
Inst. funds
Fees for service
Research funds
Group 1
0
100
0
0
0
100
0
0
Group 2
17
27
17
40
—
—
—
—
Group 3
68
3
2
27
8
64
12
16
All
32
36
7
25
8
64
12
16
Survey Tables – Page 36
OCR for page 138
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
Table 23d. Finances: Operating budget: Salary sources (%)(continued)
Veterinary assistant/tech
Diagnostic laboratory tech
Per diem revenue
Inst. funds
Fees for service
Research funds
Per diem revenue
Inst. funds
Fees for service
Research funds
Group 1
67
31
2
0
42
26
8
23
Group 2
58
20
18
4
46
20
16
18
Group 3
66
10
24
0
60
24
11
4
All
63
21
14
1
51
24
12
13
Table 23e. Finances: Operating budget: Salary sources (%)(continued)
Business manager
Senior animal care manager
Per diem revenue
Inst. funds
Fees for service
Research funds
Per diem revenue
Inst. funds
Fees for service
Research funds
Group 1
40
59
2
0
48
52
0
0
Group 2
61
39
0
0
69
25
0
5
Group 3
71
29
0
0
85
7
4
4
All
54
45
1
0
66
30
1
3
Table 23f. Finances: Operating budget: Salary sources (%)(continued)
Animal care supervisor
Animal care techs
Per diem revenue
Inst. funds
Fees for service
Research funds
Per diem revenue
Inst. funds
Fees for service
Research funds
Group 1
55
43
0
2
76
24
0
1
Group 2
82
14
0
4
84
14
0
2
Group 3
88
6
1
5
90
7
1
2
All
74
22
0
3
82
16
0
1
Table 23g. Finances: Operating budget: Salary sources (%)(continued)
Regulatory personnel
Per diem revenue
Inst. funds
Fees for service
Research funds
Group 1
25
69
3
3
Group 2
34
66
0
0
Group 3
31
69
0
0
All
30
68
1
1
Survey Tables – Page 37
OCR for page 139
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
VI. E. 3. Deficit coverage
Institutional policy for handling year–end deficits in the animal resource operating budget includes:
Table 24. Finances: Operating budget: Operating budget deficit (number of institutions)
Carried forward
Covered by the institution
Either mechanism may be used
Group 1
8
11
3
Group 2
8
8
0
Group 3
6
5
3
All
22
24
6
VI. F. Institutional subsidy
Please indicate all that apply to the institutional subsidy for your resource.
Table 25. Finances: Institutional subsidy: Overview (number of institutions) *
Received
Negotiated annually
Applied to targeted expenses
Used as discretionary account
Offsets costs for specific species
Cover year–end deficits
Response
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
Group 1
0
1
21
12
1
9
11
1
10
16
2
4
20
1
1
10
3
8
Group 2
1
0
14
10
0
6
9
0
6
9
2
4
13
0
2
6
0
8
Group 3
1
0
13
6
1
7
4
1
8
12
0
2
13
0
0
7
1
4
All
2
1
48
28
2
22
24
2
24
37
4
10
46
1
3
23
4
20
* Y = Yes; N = No; U – Uncertain
Survey Tables – Page 38
OCR for page 140
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
Operating costs to which the subsidy is typically applied are: (Tables 26a – b)
Table 26a. Finances: Institutional subsidy: Application to operating costs (number of institutions)*
Director's salary
Professional staff/ faculty salaries
Fixed equipment
Movable equipment
Supplies
Renovations (<$50,000)
Renovations (>$50,000)
Facility maintenance
Diagnostic labs
Response
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
Group 1
4
1
17
2
1
18
12
2
8
12
1
9
12
1
9
8
2
12
11
1
10
11
2
9
12
2
8
Group 2
2
0
13
5
0
11
7
0
9
8
0
7
9
0
6
6
0
9
10
0
6
10
0
6
8
0
8
Group 3
4
0
8
4
0
10
8
0
6
7
0
7
8
0
6
8
0
6
8
0
6
4
0
10
9
0
5
All
10
1
38
11
1
39
27
2
23
27
1
23
29
1
21
22
2
27
29
1
22
25
2
25
29
2
21
* Y = Yes; N = No; U – Uncertain
Table 26b. Finances: Institutional subsidy: Application to operating costs (continued) (number of institutions)*
Program development
IACUC operations
Regulatory services from veterinarians
Hazardous–waste disposal
AAALAC accreditation
Occupational health
Response
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
N
U
Y
Group 1
12
2
8
12
1
9
7
1
14
12
1
9
12
2
8
12
2
8
Group 2
9
1
6
8
0
8
5
0
11
11
0
5
8
0
8
9
1
6
Group 3
10
0
4
3
0
10
5
0
9
5
0
9
7
0
7
3
0
1
All
31
3
18
23
1
27
17
1
34
28
1
23
27
2
23
24
3
25
* Y = Yes; N = No; U – Uncertain
Please indicate the subsidy for the fiscal year reported in the survey for:
Table 27. Finances: Institutional subsidy: Subsidy for fiscal year reported (mean in thousands of dollars)
For direct operating budget
For regulatory activities
For renovations & equipment
For all other categories
Total subsidy
Subsidy as % of direct operating expense
Group 1
471
20
48
23
616
45
Group 2
306
39
25
306
804
28
Group 3
318
59
121
51
841
20
All
381
36
61
116
727
33
Survey Tables – Page 39
OCR for page 141
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
VI. G. Indirect cost recovery
The current federally negotiated indirect cost rate for your institution and your animal resource (if different) is:
The status of implementation of OMB Circular A–21 at your institution:
Institutional strategies for complying with A–21 include:
Table 28a. Finances: Indirect cost recovery (%)*
Status of OMB circular A–
21 implementation Institutional strategies for complying with A–21
Federal indirect cost rate for institution
No current plans for implementation
Increase animal user fees
Designate animal resource space as organized research space
Subsidize resource with institutional funds
Group 1
50
22
43
22
48
Group 2
56
25
56
48
50
Group 3
57
21
43
43
43
All
54
23
47
32
47
*Only 1 institution in group 1 and 2 in group 3 had a different ICR for the animal resource
The estimated increase in per diem rates for mice if the full cost is absorbed by recharges:
The actual increase in per diem rates for mice after institutional strategies (indicated above) were activated was:
The impact of A–21 implementation on animal census was:
Table 28b. Finances: Indirect cost recovery (continued) (%)
Impact of A–21 implementation on animal census
Estimated increase in per diem rates for MICE if full cost is absorbed by recharges
Actual increase in per diem rates for MICE after compensatory institutional strategies were activated
Permanent census decrease
Transient census decrease
Too early to tell
Group 1
72
9
2
3
10
Group 2
59
20
0
2
6
Group 3
54
16
1
1
4
All
64
13
3
6
20
Survey Tables – Page 40
OCR for page 142
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
VII. Regulatory Program Issues
Table 29. Regulatory program: Overview*
Resource AAALAC accredited (number of institutions)
Number of active animal use protocols
Number of full protocols reviewed annually by IACUC
Number of members serving on IACUC
Staff FTEs employed by IACUC
Annual budget for IACUC ($)
Program for monitoring animal experimentation apart from semi– annual IACUC inspections?
No
Yes
No
Yes
Group 1
2
21
660
206
14
1.1
62,728
7
16
Group 2
1
15
425
400
16
1.9
85,928
4
12
Group 3
0
14
608
380
21
2.5
164,295
1
12
All
3
50
575
310
16
1.8
97,810
12
40
*AAALAC: Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care; IACUC: institutional animal care and use committee
Please indicate the compliance roles played by the staff/faculty veterinarians.
Primary responsibility for:
How many FTEs are designated for meeting regulatory requirements for training and monitoring of animal use?
Table 30. Regulatory program: Staff duties and responsibilities
Initial review of every protocol
Initial review of selected protocols
Advise investigators on protocol preparation
Train animal users
FTEs for training & monitoring animal use
Veterinarians
Other staff
Group 1
18
5
23
22
1.0
0.9
Group 2
14
5
15
13
1.0
3.6
Group 3
12
6
12
13
0.9
2.1
All
44
16
50
48
0.9
1.9
Survey Tables – Page 41
OCR for page 143
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
VIII. Resource–client Relationships
Please rank the following potential concerns among animal users at your institution.
Table 31. Resource–client relationships (number of institutions)*
Animal user concerns
Ranking based on
Per diem rates
Animal procurement fees
Animal housing space
Quality/ reliability of physical plant
Quality of animal care services
Quality of lab animal medicine services
Regulatory programs
Training for animal users
Institutional support for resource
Informal survey
Formal survey
Rating
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
Group 1
1
12
7
3
9
13
0
0
6
11
4
2
7
10
4
2
12
10
1
0
17
6
0
0
5
14
4
0
9
13
1
0
5
12
6
0
19
5
Group 2
1
7
4
4
3
7
2
0
4
6
4
2
7
7
2
0
9
7
0
0
13
2
1
0
2
9
4
1
7
7
2
0
3
8
2
2
14
3
Group 3
2
10
0
2
5
5
2
1
4
6
1
3
4
10
0
0
6
6
2
0
9
4
1
6
2
8
4
0
5
8
1
0
3
8
1
2
12
3
All
4
29
11
9
17
25
4
1
14
23
9
7
18
27
6
2
27
23
3
0
39
12
2
6
9
31
12
1
21
28
4
0
11
28
9
4
45
11
* 1 = high; 2 = moderate; 3 = fair; 4 = poor
Survey Tables – Page 42
OCR for page 144
STRATEGIES THAT INFLUENCE COST CONTAINMENT IN ANIMAL RESEARCH FACILITIES
This page in the original is blank.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
survey tables