The cost of sponsored research at institutions of higher learning in low- and middle-income countries: a cross-sectional study

Introduction Research in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is challenged with poor investment by both in-country governments and philanthropies. Although research grants cover costs directly associated with specific research projects, they do not fully cover costs that are indirectly attributable to specific projects. The relationship between grant funding and actual cost of paying for such projects at institutions of higher learning (IHL) in LMICs is poorly understood. Our purpose was to evaluate unaccounted costs associated with grants and explore the system level factors that support or hinder the goal of “breaking even”. Materials and methods We used a descriptive retrospective cross-sectional design to evaluate unaccounted costs and qualitative interviews with stakeholders at three prominent medical universities in Tanzania. Data were obtained from annual audited Final Reports and Final Financial Reports for biomedical and social and behavioral sciences (non-biomedical) sponsored projects funded from 2007 through 2017. Findings A total of 17 projects were included in the study, of which 6 (35.3%) were biomedical and 11 (64.7%) non-biomedical. The median total amount of project funding for all biomedical research projects was US$ 544,084; interquartile range (IQR) [89,268-1,226,570]. These projects had median unaccounted costs of US$ 186,403 (IQR) [30,583– 420,223]. The median funding for non-biomedical sponsored research projects was US$ 902,999 (IQR) [468,259–1,951,212] and unaccounted costs were US$ 112,875 (IQR) [58,532–243,902]. 27 faculty and staff at study sites participated in interviews. Three themes emerged-costing practices, unaccounted-for costs, and budget negotiating power. Conclusion The study demonstrated that there was a substantial amount of unaccounted-for costs for sponsored projects. Costing and financial practices associated with sponsored research projects were weak, coupled with lopsided negotiating power with funding agencies. Funding agencies and institutions in this study should work to reduce the inequity in research costs.