Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
We have gone back and forth on this, and currently decide based on a given meeting and the type of industry attendee. If we’re trying to learn from them and they’re not actively committed to our disease area, we pay for their travel. If
they provide significant in-kind support at the meeting, such as speaking about their data or work, we would also consider paying for their travel. But if they are actively working in our area and the meeting is of interest to them, we do not cover their travel
expenses.Good luck!
Penny
Penny Dacks PhD
Chief Scientific Officer, AFTD
President, FTD Disorders Registry
My working hours may not be the same as your working hours. Please do not feel the need to respond outside of your working hours.
From: HRA Forums <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2026 4:26 PM
To: Penny Dacks <[email protected]>
Subject: New post in Info: “Covering Travel Cost for Industry Meeting Participants”We have allowed up to 10% indirects for several years for our non-fellowship grants, 0% for fellowships. We have not yet decided on a change based on the current climate and I cannot guarantee what our board would authorize. I think it likely that we could shift to up to 15% if that became the norm, particularly for the non-seed grants.
We are not spending time yet on either benchmarking or deciding on a change, if any, until we see how things stabilize. With indirects as only one of many sources of disruption to the federal landscape, we are monitoring but waiting to decide how our very limited resources might be best used to mitigate the damage to the research that is important to our community.
Penny
Penny Dacks PhD
Senior Director, Scientific Initiatives, AFTD
President, FTD Disorders Registry