National Resources Committee 



especially if the Council could act both promptly and 

 definitely on specific proposals, and if its advice could 

 be informal enough to be rejected in whole or in part 

 without embarrassment when considerations other 

 than the research program itself make rejection advis- 

 able. Such a procedure by a Research Advisory 

 Council -would probably depend upon the existence of 

 staff members with sufficient authority to give, without 

 prior formal action by the Council, suggestions that 

 would represent the approximate views of the Councih 



Possible Misdirected Criticisms 



Part of the complaint that there is opposition to 

 research by the Bureau of the Budget and congres- 

 sional appropriation committees, and even by the de- 

 partmental budget officers, is probably due to the fact 

 that the process of budgetary review permits someone 

 else to be blamed by the research personnel when the 

 administrative head of the bureau permits research 

 funds to be reduced. Just as the Civil Service Com- 

 mission is used as a convenient scapegoat in personnel 

 requests that are, in reality, decided adversely within 

 the requesting agency, so the Bureau of the Budget 

 and the appropriation committees are convenient 

 "bogey men" for use by the agency's own administra- 

 tive officers, who have not been convinced of the useful- 

 ness of a research project but who wish to divert to 

 someone else the onus of a decision based on their 

 beliefs. 



Another reason for the complaint of lack of funds 

 is probably the same as the similar complaint from 

 almost every agency and from advocates of nearly 

 every kind of program. Since total governmental ap- 

 propriations are limited, budgetary control necessarily 

 means curtailment of many worthwhile proposals. 

 Planning for the Government as a whole is as essential 

 for research activities as for other work. Undoubtedly 

 it will always be possible to point to probable errors 

 that have been made in judging the comparative long- 

 time value to the nation of different projects requiring 

 additional funds. It is probable also that curtailment 

 or elimination of nonresearch items may not be brought 

 so forcefully to the attention of a research director as 

 the rebuffs to his own well-considered plans. 



Financial Administration of 

 Research Projects 



The Problem 



Some potential flexibility in a research program, 

 permitting changes in plans as unforeseen contingen- 

 cies occur, is important for efficient and progressive 

 administration. Federal agencies carrying on research 

 are sometimes said to be seriously hampered in their 

 work by restrictions that prevent the most effective use 



of funds appropriated, especially in dealing advan- 

 tageously with unexpectedly favorable opportunities to 

 push forward particular projects. Even retrenchment 

 may be retarded in investigations that have run their 

 coui'se of greatest usefulness, when funds that might 

 be saved by immediate curtailment cannot be trans- 

 feri'ed to other uses where expansion is taking place. 



The complaint of restrictions on freedom of research 

 management is not a new one. Except that the specific 

 objects of complaint are different, the following extract 

 of testimony, before a committee of the House of Rep- 

 resentatives in 1902, is essentially the same as the com- 

 plaint today: 



In every scientific bureau the feeling frequently arises that 

 the auditors' requirements and restrictions, based largely on 

 precedent as they are, tend to obstruct the freedom of action 

 which is requisite to progress in research and in making new 

 applications of Ijnowledge ; and it would seem evident that the 

 administration of the scientific work would be simplified and 

 increased in effectiveness if a larger power of interpretation of 

 laws and regulation of studies were rested in the administra- 

 tives charged with the special work, and if the scrutiny of 

 accounts connected with such work were intrusted to a single 

 auditor, who would naturally come to appreciate the distinc- 

 tive requirements of these constructive branches of the Gov- 

 ernment service.' 



Kinds of Restrictions 



There are several kinds of restrictions in the use of 

 appropriations that seem important to research direc- 

 tors. Probably first in importance is the impossibility 

 of shifting small amounts of funds within a single 

 agency from one previously designated appropriation 

 to another. This impediment may be serious when 

 research funds are divided into minute appropriation 

 paragraphs in which the amounts carried must be 

 proposed by the research director from 10 to 12 months 

 previous to the beginning of the fiscal year in which 

 the funds can be spent. In addition, there may be 

 special limitations or prohibitions in the text of an 

 appropriation paragraph which were inserted orig- 

 inally to deal with a temporary circumstance and have 

 been continued from year to year by inertia. 



Quite different from transfers between appropria- 

 tions within the same agency are interagencj- transfers 

 that enable one organization to ask other specialized 

 Government agencies to perform work within their 

 respective fields on a reimbursement basis. Prevention 

 of such interagency transfers would handicap efficient 

 operations in the Government service and would bring 

 about duplication of equipment and activities. 



A third type of restriction on administrative action 

 is caused by limitations or prohibitions oti the pur- 

 chase or hiring of personnel, services, or materials 



'W. J. McGee, March 31, 1902. Hearing (on bills) establishing a 

 Department of Commerce, Labor, Industries, and Manufactures, p. 131. 



