#  Gift vs. Sponsored Research Policy: Quick Reference Policy Summary 

 



 ##  

  expand\_more  

 
  

 

 Purpose: This is meant to serve as a complementary table to the Policy on Distinguishing Gifts vs. Sponsored Awards and as a reference in the event of questions. The table highlights general characteristics of these two funding categories. In the event of questions, please contact Alumni and Development Services at <ads@harvard.edu> or the Office for Sponsored Programs at <osp@harvard.edu>.

Sort  Table 1: Gift vs. Sponsored Award Summary       Gift   Sponsored Award       Benefit received by funder from activities funded 

  Serves philanthropic or personal interest of funder, but does not serve the primary business purpose of the funder

 No benefit received

 

  Serves the primary business or mission interest of the funder, whose basic activities are integrally related to the research plan

 Benefit received

 

    Specificity of intent of funder 

  Funder seeks advances in a general area of research or education; or seeks advances in a specific area, but without prescribing specific strategies or workplans 

  Funder seeks implementation of a specific research or education plan, with well‐defined objectives, strategies, workplans and/or deliverables 

    Value exchanged 

  Funder essentially receives no personal or institutional value in return for the funds given, other than intellectual satisfaction that the activities have been undertaken

 No deliverables provided

 

  Funder expects and receives implementation of, and a report of, the University’s funded activities; funder’s own mission and/or research agenda is advanced through the University’s funded activities

 Deliverables provided

 

    Scope of work 

  More generally defined; typically no time frame or period of performance 

  More specifically defined with a clear period of performance 

    Persons performing funded activities 

  Often left to discretion of University, school, department or one named individual 

  Key personnel (or the equivalent project leadership team) are named in proposal, and changes to key personnel must be pre‐approved by funder 

    Budget specificity and restrictions 

  Budgeting is general in nature and terms, and funder pre‐approvals are not required as long as funds are used for the stated purpose 

  Budgets are specific, and variances from proposed budgets (within designated parameters) require funder pre‐approval 

    Progress reports 

  May be required but are most often general in nature and content 

  Required, and must outline progress toward the specific research or project plan 

    Terms of funding 

  Less detailed 

  Often detailed, with standard, detailed terms and conditions for all funding from that sponsor 

    Accountability for use of funds 

  More moral than legal 

  More legal than moral 

    Ability of funder to recoup funds 

  Generally very difficult to recoup, except in cases of deliberate, proven use of restricted funds inconsistent with terms of a restricted gift 

  Established ability of funder to terminate the agreement and/or demand repayment of funds, if specific research or project plans have not been implemented 

    Method of documentation 

  Letter of intent of funder in making award 

  Binding (often signed) agreement between University and funder, binding University to implement specific research or project plans