Cost (non)-recovery by platform technology facilities in the Bio21 Cluster

• Published in: Journal of biomolecular techniques Vol. 21; no. 1; pp. 29 - 34
• Main Authors: Gibbs, Gerard, Clark, Stella, Quinn, Julieanne, Gleeson, Mary Joy
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Association of Biomolecular Resource Facilities 01.04.2010
• Subjects: Australia; Biomedical Research - economics; Biomedical Research - instrumentation; Biomedical Research - organization & administration; Biotechnology - economics; Biotechnology - instrumentation; Biotechnology - organization & administration; Capital Financing; Costs and Cost Analysis; Data Collection; Australia; core facilities management; research cluster; biomedical
• ISSN: 1524-0215; 1943-4731

Platform technologies (PT) are techniques or tools that enable a range of scientific investigations and are critical to today's advanced technology research environment. Once installed, they require specialized staff for their operations, who in turn, provide expertise to researchers in designing appropriate experiments. Through this pipeline, research outputs are raised to the benefit of the researcher and the host institution. Platform facilities provide access to instrumentation and expertise for a wide range of users beyond the host institution, including other academic and industry users. To maximize the return on these substantial public investments, this wider access needs to be supported. The question of support and the mechanisms through which this occurs need to be established based on a greater understanding of how PT facilities operate. This investigation was aimed at understanding if and how platform facilities across the Bio21 Cluster meet operating costs. Our investigation found: 74% of platforms surveyed do not recover 100% of direct operating costs and are heavily subsidized by their home institution, which has a vested interest in maintaining the technology platform; platform managers play a major role in establishing the costs and pricing of the facility, normally in a collaborative process with a management committee or institutional accountant; and most facilities have a three-tier pricing structure recognizing internal academic, external academic, and commercial clients.